HD 

90704 
U5 

»83<o 


"K/i        •»  '^JtS^ 


i  -^ 


LIBRARY 

JW^IVERSIi  ^         CALIFORNIA 
DAVIS 


LETTER 


THE  SECRETARY  OF  THE   TREASURY, 


THAK8MITTINO 


TABLES   AND  NOTES 


CULTIVATION,  MANUFACTURE,  AND  FOREIGN  TRADE 


COTTON. 


April  5,  1836. 

Ordered,  That  1,000  copies  of  this  document  be  printed  for  the  use  of  the  Senate. 


WASHINGTON : 
raisTEn  bt  gales  &  sbatoh. 

1836. 


LIBRARY 

UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA: 
PAVI§ 


CULTURE,  &c.  OF  COTTON. 


Treasury  Department, 

February  29^  \SS6. 

Sir:  Certain  tabular  statements  and  notes  on  the  cultivation 
and  manufacture,  together  with  the  imports  and  exports  of  cotton, 
are  herewith  submitted  to  the  House  of  Representatives,  in  com- 
pliance with  their  resolution  of  the  12th  instant  : 

^^  Resolved,  That  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury  be  directed  to 
transmit  to  this  House  the  tables  indicated  in  a  note  to  his  annual 
report,  showing  the  progress  in  the  cultivation  and  manufacture 
of  cotton  in  the  United  States,  and  in  other  countries ;  also,  show- 
ing the  comparative  quantity  and  value  of  exports  and  imports  of 
cotton,  and  cotton  manufactures,  in  the  United  States  and  other 
countries." 

In  order  that  the  true  character  of  these  tables  may  be  under- 
stood, and  no  expectation  as  to  their  contents  be  formed  which  an 
examination  of  them  might  disappoint,  a  brief  explanation  will  be 
given  of  their  origin,  progress,  and  present^state  of  completion. 

They  were  not  commenced  till  the  last  year ;  were  at  first 
very  limited  in  their  object,  and  have  been  attended  to  since 
only  at  a  few  brief  intervals  of  leisure.  In  the  course  of  that 
year,  while  making  official  investigations,  they  were  begun,  with 
a  view  to  the  collection  of  such  general  statistical  facts  as  might 


sirable.  But  as  that  minuteness  did  not  come  within  the  scope 
of  my  original  examinations,  what"  1  have  thus  hastily  collected 
and  presented  must  be  regarded  rather  as  a  few  general  facts  for 
comparison,  and  as  hints  or  suggestions,  to  be  followed  out  by 
others  who  enjoy  more  leisure,  than  as  a  full  compilation  of  sta- 
tistics on  the  subject  of  cotton.  Yet,  in  their  present  imperfect 
and  meager  state  under  some  heads,  they  still  contain,  under 
each,  it  is  hoped,  a  few  data  which  may  prove  useful,  since  they 
bring  together,  in  a  condensed  and  systematic  view,  many  scat- 
tered details  on  a  subject  very  important  to  the  finances  of  the 
country  at  this  time,  as  well  as  to  its  future  prosperity,  in  each  of 
the  three  great  branches  of  national  industry — agriculture,  com- 
merce, and  manufactures. 

Any  inferences  or  suggestions  on  the  influence  of  tariffs  upon 
the  growth  or  manufacture  of  cotton,  or  on  the  propriety  of  pro- 
tection to  manufactures  or  other  branches  of  our  national  inter- 
ests, w^hich  have  been  so  much  agitated  in  former  years,  were 
studiously  avoided,  as  not  called  for  by  the  occasion,  or  the  pres- 
ent condition  of  the  country. 

The  notes  contain  numerous  illustrations,  additional  explana- 
tions, and  facts,  which  could  not  be  conveniently  incorporated 
into  the  tables ;  and  some  of  which  are  very  material  for  deci- 
ding correctly  upon  the  accuracy  of  the  figures  and  statements 
contained  in  the  different  columns. 

The  general  arrangement  of  the  tables  and  notes  is  such  as  to 
present,  first,  the  facts  and  estimates  on  the  growth  or  the  crop  of 
cotton,  so  far  as  practicable,  for  a  number  of  different  years,  in 
those  countries  in  the  world  where  it  is  most  cultivated.  They 
exhibit,  next,  the  foreign  trade  in  raw  cotton,  by  giving  the  exports 
and  imports  of  it  at  several  periods  from  and  to  most  of  the  places 
abroad  where  it  constitutes  an  article  of  much  commerce. 

The  third  set  of  tables  shows  the  amount  and  condition  of  the 
manufacture  of  cotton,  and  its  consumption  at  different  dates,  in 
most  of  the  countries  where  it  is  extensively  used ;  and  the  last 
series  shows  the  foreign  trade  in  those  manufactures,  during  a 
number  of  years,  from  and  to  many  of  the  principal  places  en- 
gaged in  it. 


A  more  minute  explanation  of  the  contents  of  each  table  and 
its  notes  is  given,  for  convenience  of  reference,  in  the  schedule 
annexed. 

With  these  hasty  explanatory  remarks, 
I  have  the  honor  to  he, 
Very  respectfully. 

Your  obedient  servant, 

LEVI  WOODBURY, 
Secretary  of  the  Treasury. 
Hon.  James  K.  Polk, 

Speaker  of  the  House  of  Representatwes. 


8 


SCHEDULE  OF  THE  TABLES  AND  NOTES. 

At  J9,  and  C  relate  to  the  crop  or  growth  of  raw  cotton. 

A  gives  the  quantity  supposed  to  be  raised  in  the  world  at  a  few  different  periods, 

and  in  each  country  where  it  grows. 
B  gives  the  quantity  computed  to  be  grown  at  several  dates,  in  each  of  the  South 

em  and  Southwestern  States  of  this  Union. 
C  gives  the  prices  of  it  here,  and  in  England,  for  many  years  ;  the  capital  and 

the  number  of  persons  estimated  to  be  employed  in  growing  it,  and  the  value 

of  the  whole  crop  here  and  elsewhere. 

D,  Ey  F,  G,  H  relate  to  the  foreign  trade^  or  the  exports  and  imports  of  raw  cotton. 

D  gives  the  exports  from  the  different  quarters  of  the  world  chiefly  engaged  in 
that  trade,  at  a  few  separate  periods. 

E  gives  the  exports  from  most  of  the  important  places  in  the  United  States  whence 
it  is  shipped. 

F  gives  the  exports  from  and  to  most  of  the  countries  engaged  extensively  in  this 
trade. 

G  gives  the  imports  of  it  into  England,  at  several  dates,  and  the  amount  from  each 
of  the  most  important  countries  raising  it. 

H  gives  the  imports  into  France,  and  whence,  as  well  as  the  imports  into  a  num- 
ber of  other  places. 

Jy  Ky  L  relate  to  the  manufacture  and  consumpiion  of  raw  cotton,  in  several  countries. 

J  gives  the  amount  used  and  manufactured  in  most  of  the  countries  where  raw 

cotton  is  much  worked  up. 
K  gives  the  value  of  the  manufactures  of  it  u\  several  countries,  and  the  amount  of 

capital  employed  in  them. 
L  gives  the  spindles  and  number  of  persons  employed  in  the  manufacture,  in  some 

places,  at  different  periods. 

3/,  N,  0  relate  to  the  foreign  trade  in  cotton  manufactures. 

M  gives  the  exports  of  them  from  several  countries. 

N  gives  the  exports  of  them  from  England,  and  the  amounts  exported  thence  to 
several  enumerated  places,  at  different  periods,  so  as  to  exhibit  in  the  same 
table  the  imports  of  them  into  the  same  places  from  England. 

O  gives  the  exports  of  them  from  several  other  countries,  and  whither. 


P  is  the  last  of  the  tables,  and  merely  presents  an  exhibit  of  the  dates  of  the  most 
important  changes  in  the  growth,  manufacture,  and  foreign  trade  of  cotton, 
within  the  period  chiefly  referred  to  in  the  other  tables. 


INTRODUCTORY    NOTE. 

In  the  subsequent  tables  the  quantity  of  raw  cotton  has  been 
computed  in  pounds,  and  when  stated  in  the  weights  of  other 
countries  by  the  authors  referred  to,  the  edition  (1831 )  of  Kel- 
ly's Cambist  has  been  followed  as  a  guide  about  the  contents  of 
the  kilogramme,  maud,  picul,  &c.  The  prices  and  values,  when 
found  in  the  denominations  of  foreign  currencies,  have  also  gen- 
erally been  reduced  to  dollars  and  cents,  computing  the  pound 
sterling  at  ^4.80 ;  and  the  statements  of  all  considerable  quanti- 
ties and  amounts  have  usually  been  made  only  in  millions  and 
large  fractions  of  millions.  This  has  been  done  for  convenience 
and  uniformity,  and  was  supposed  to  be  sufficient,  if  not  better, 
for  the  comparative  and  general  purposes  contemplated  in  the 
original  formation  of  the  tables. 

As  most  persons  in  conversation,  and  most  authors,  speak  of 
"  bales"  or  "  bags,"  rather  than  pounds  of  cotton,  whether  re- 
ferring to  the  crop,  the  manufacture,  or  the  exports  and  imports 
of  it,  some  further  explanation  may  be  proper,  to  show  why  the 
term  has  nest  been  employed  in  the  statements  contained  in  any 
of  these  tables. 

It  was  early  discovered,  in  the  preparation  of  them,  that  many 
contradictions  and  errors  happened,  from  the  uncertain  quantity 
indicated  by  different  persons  in  the  use  of  those  terms,  and  which 
might  be  obviated  by  always  making  the  statements  in  pounds, 
and  giving  in  a  note  the  amount  computed  to  be  contained  in 
bales  and  bags  in  different  countries,  so  that  the  pounds  could, 
when  desirable,  be  converted  again  readily  into  bales  or  bags. 
By  pursuing  this  course  of  using  only  the  term  pounds,  the  great 
object  of  comparison  between  the  quantities  of  cotton  grown  or 
manufactured  or  exported,  at  different  periods,  and  in  different 
countries,  could  also  be  more  clearly  and  quickly  accomplished. 

In  illustration  of  these  remarks,  and  to  furnish  the  quantity 
usually  contained  in  each  bale,  bag,  &c.,it  appears  that,  in  1790, 
2 


10 

the  bale  or  bag  in  the  United  States  was  computed  at  only  200 
pounds.  (See  Treasury  report,  15th  February,  1791.)  In  the 
Atlantic  States  it  is  now  estimated  often  at  300  and  325  pounds, 
but  in  those  on  the  Gulf  of  Mexico,  at  400  and  450  pounds. 
Those  used  at  Lowell,  in  1831,  contained,  on  an  average,  361 
pounds.     (Pitkin's  Statistics,  page  527,  note.) 

At  Liverpool  the  Sea-island  bale  was,  a  few  years  ago,  esti- 
mated at  280  pounds,  and  the  Upland  at  320.  The  bales  im- 
ported into  France  are  estimated  at  300  pounds  each,by  Baines's 
History  of  Cotton,  page  525.  In  1824  all  the  bales  imported  into 
Liverpool  averaged  266  pounds,  and  increased  yearly,  till  in 
1832  they  weighed,  on  an  average,  319  pounds,  (McCullocb, 
page  441.)  Though  on  the  previous  page  he  considers  from  300 
to  310  pounds  a  fair  average;  and  Burns,  cited  on  same  page, 
makes  it  310  pounds  in  1832.  The  Egyptian  bale  contained  once 
only  90  pounds;  the  Brazilian,  180  pounds;  (Pitk.,  485;)  the 
West  Indian,  350  pounds;  and  the  Colombian  bale  or  quintal, 
101  pounds.  (Cyclop,  of  Com.)  In  1832,  Burns  says  the  aver- 
age of  the  United  States  bale  or  bag  imported  into  England,  was 
345  pounds;  Brazilian,  180 pounds;  Egyptian,  220;  West  Indian, 
300  pounds;  East  Indian,  330  pounds.     (See  McCulloch,  441.) 

The  amount  of  our  own  exports  does  not  dependon  computa- 
tions from  any  of  these  data,  but  on  the  actual  weight  in  pounds, 
sworn  to  at  the  custom-house. 

By  the  last  annual  report  of  the  Liverpool  market,  made  in 
January,  1836,  it  appears  that  the  bales  have  so  altered  in  their 
quantity,  that  the  estimate  of  the  present  bales  or  bags  iS — for 
the  Upland,  321  pounds  ;  for  Orleans  and  Alabama,  402  pounds  ; 
for  Sea-island,  322  pounds;  for  Brazil,  173  pounds;  for  Egyptian, 
218  pounds  ;  for  East  India,  360  pounds  ;  and  for  West  India,  230 
pounds.  As  improvements  are  made  in  pressing  and  packing 
closer,  to  save  something  in  the  expense  of  bagging  and  freight, 
the  constant  tendency  has  been  here  to  increase  the  weight  in  a 
bale. 


12 

- 

A. 

COTTON— RAW. 

Crop  of  cotton  grown  in — [1] 

.1 

CO 

V 

B 

02 

£3 

< 

andS. 
ica,  ex- 
Jrazil. 

0) 

4) 

1 

"5 

1 

l-H 

IB 

.5 

O 

1 

Mexico 
Ameri 
ceptI 

Si 

i 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

Sh 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Miirs. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Miirs. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

1789 

- 

1 

1790 

- 

H 

1791 

490 

2 

22 

12 

_ 

46 

1.10 

190 

68 

20 

1792 

[2] 

3 

1793 

5 

1794 

_ 

8 

1795 

- 

8 

1796 

_ 

10 

1797 

_ 

11 

1798 

_ 

15 

1799 

_ 

20 

1800 

_ 

35 

1801 

520 

48 

36 

10 

_ 

45 

160 

160 

56 

15 

1802 

«. 

55 

1803 

_ 

60 

1804 

_ 

65 

4 

1805 

_ 

70 

1806 

_ 

80 

1807 

_ 

80 

1808 

_ 

75 

1809 

_ 

82 

1810 

_    ■ 

85 

1811 

555 

80 

35 

12 

-L- 

44 

170 

146 

57 

11 

1812 

[3] 

75 

1813 

75 

1814 

_ 

70 

1815 

_ 

100 

1816 

_ 

124 

^ 

1817 

_ 

130 

1818 

_ 

125 

1819 

_. 

167 

1820 

_ 

160 

1821 

630 

180 

32 

10 

6 

40 

175 

135 

44 

a 

1822 

_ 

210 

o 

1823 

_ 

185 

1 

1824 

- 

215 

1 

13 


A.—COTTON— RAW— Continued. 


Crop  of  cotton  grown  in — [1] 


!2 

o 

j3 

1 

<u 

1 

a. 
>> 

fco 

o 
o 

(L> 

ci 

.2 

o 

exico  and  S. 
America,  ex- 
cept Brazil. 

CD 

<u 

H 

^ 

05 

W 

tf 

tf 

0^ 

H 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

>• 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

1825 

_ 

255 

1826 

_ 

350 

1827 

- 

270 

1828 

_ 

325 

1829 

_ 

365 

1830 

- 

350 

1831 

820 

385 

38 

9 

18 

36 

180 

115 

35 

4 

1832 

_ 

390 

1833 

_ 

445 

1834 

900 

460 

30 

8 

25^ 

34 

185 

110 

35 

13 

1835 

[12] 

[4] 

[5] 

[6] 

[7] 

[8] 

[9] 

[10] 

[11] 

[1.]  It  will  be  seen  by  the  phraseology  adopted,  that  the  crop 
given  against  each  year  is  that  grown,  and  not  that  brought  to 
market  in  the  year,  and  that  the  year  meant  in  the  table  is  the 
calendar,  and  not  the  fiscal  year.  This  course  has  been  pursued 
as  more  appropriate  when  applied  to  the  raising  of  a  crop ;  but 
in  selling  it,  "  the  crop  of  1835,"  for  example,  is  often  spoken  of 
by  others,  when  that  which  grew  in  1834  is  the  crop  alluded  to. 
This  explanation  will  enable  all  to  make  their  comparisons  in  the 
mode  most  convenient  to  them,  and  will  remove  some  apparent 
contradictions  between  certain  authors. 

[2.]  In  forming  an  estimate  of  the  whole  crop  of  cotton  grown 
in  the  world  in  any  particular  year,  I  have  found  no  precedent 
to  aid  me  except  for  the  single  year  of  1834,  when  evidence  was 
given  before  the  Chamber  of  Peers,  in  France,  that  it  probably 
amounted  to  about  460  millions  of  pounds.  But  this  computation 
was  so  deficient,  assigning  none  to  Mexico,  and  none  to  South 
America  or  Africa,  except  to  Brazil  24  millions  of  pounds,  and 
to  Egypt  20  millions  of  pounds,  and  only  6Q  millions  of  pounds 


.  14 

to  India,  and  350  millions  of  pounds  to  the  United  States,  and 
the  balance  of  6  millions  of  pounds  to  the  West  Indies,  that  no 
safe  reliance  could  be  placed  on  it  as  correct  for  the  whole  known 
world.  My  own  course  has  been  to  ascertain  from  all  attainable 
sources  the  exports  in  raw  cotton  of  each  country ;  to  add  to  those 
the  probable  amount  consumed  at  home  and  not  exported,  look- 
ing to  the  climate  of  the  place,  the  habits  of  its  population,  and 
the  scattered  facts  on  this  point  found  in  respectable  authors,  and 
then  to  compute  therefrom  the  whole  quantity  grown.  Another 
general  test  of  the  correctness  of  one  of  my  conclusions,  viz.,. 
that  the  whole  crop  in  the  world  has  quite  doubled  in  the  last 
half  century,  and  now  equals  900  millions  of  pounds,  though 
the  estimate  before  named  is  only  460  millions  of  pounds,  exists 
in  the  fact,  that  a  greater  increase  than  this  has  happened  in  the 
crop  of  the  United  States  alone  ;  and  though,  in  some  other 
countries,  a  diminution  has  occurred  in  the  exports  of  cotton  from 
various  caUvSes,  which  need  not  here  be  detailed,  yet  the  use  of 
it  has  probably  been  reduced  in  no  country;  and  in  many,  within 
that  period,  it  has,  from  greater  cheapness,  by  improvements  in 
machinery  and  steam,  with  its  healthfulness,  compared  with  other 
clothing,  largely  increased,  and  in  some  been  for  the  first  time 
introduced.  Supposing  that  in  warm  climates,  and  in  a  popula- 
tion not  highly  civilized,  as  in  Turkey,  two  pounds  of  cotton  per 
head  for  each  person  are  yearly  consumed,  (see  Urquhart  on 
Turkey,  page  150,)  and  in  the  south  of  China  and  India,  not  over 
one  and  a  half  pounds  to  each  person,  and  in  the  places  near  or 
under  the  equator,  still  less;  and  that,  in  more  civilized  countries 
where  cotton  is  used,  as  in  England,  France,  and  the  United 
States,  from  eight  to  twelve  pounds  per  head  are  consumed ;  and 
supposing  that  only  a  little  more  than  half  the  population  of  the 
globe,  estimated  at  four  hundred  and  fifty  millions,  use  cotton, 
the  consumption  would,  on  an  average  at  only  two  pounds  per 
head,  be  quite  equal  to  the  estimated  crop  for  the  whole  world. 
For  some  years  past  it  is  supposed  that  the  consumption  of  cotton 
has  been  greater  than  the  crop,  and  hence,  that  the  old  stocks  on 
hands  have  been  more  exhausted,  and  a  larger  portion  of  the  new 
crop  called  for  early.  (See  table  I.)  This  has  sustained  the 
price,  and  required  an  augmented  crop  of  at  least  20  millions  of 
pounds  per  annum.  See  post,  and  evidence  before  the  French 
Chambers,  February,  1835. 

[3.]  The  crop  as  well  as  the  export  of  cotton  of  the  United 
States,  from  1809  to  1815,  was  sensibly  diminished  by  means  of 
our  commercial  restrictions  and  war,  and  the  crop  of  other  coun- 


Jt5 

tries  was  increased  to  supply  the  place  of  ours  in  foreign  con- 
sumption. Our  crop  has  been  computed  with  more  care  and 
from  better  data,  than  the  crop  of  other  portions  of  the  world. 
From  1821  to  1834  it  has  been  estimated  by  others  much  lower 
than  in  the  table,  and  as  follows  : 


Years. 

Mill' 

s  of  lbs. 

Years. 

Mill' 

s  of  lbs. 

1821 

- 

- 

Ill 

1828 

- 

- 

213i 

1822 

- 

- 

12U 

1829 

- 

_ 

2551 

1823 

. 

- 

136 

1830 

- 

- 

292 

1824 

- 

-_ 

152f 

1831 

- 

- 

311f 

1825 

- 

- 

1691 

1832 

- 

- 

296i 

1826 

- 

«- 

211f 

1833 

- 

- 

360 

1827 

- 

- 

285 

1834 

- 

-. 

320i 

The  above  is  from  Marshall's  tables  on  the  trade,  manufac- 
tures, &c.  of  England,  page  110.  In  McCulloch's  Commercial 
Dictionary,  page  434,  Reuss's  tables,  page  270,  and  Baines's 
History  of  Cotton,  page  303,  similar  statements  are  made,  but 
they  are  manifestly  too  low,  as  being  often  less  in  quantity  than 
our  exports  ;  and  they  may  differ  occasionally  from  being  founded 
on  the  exports  of  a  particular  year,  as  1825,  and  which  were 
chiefly  made  up  of  the  smaller  crop  grown  in  a  previous  year, 
as  in  1824.  They  are  incorrect  even  then,  as  our  crop  for 
many  calendar  years  has  been  from  50  to  90  millions  of  pounds 
more  than  the  exports  of  each  succeeding  fiscal  year ;  this  last 
being  composed  of  the  growth  of  the  previous  calendar  year, 
with  a  small  portion  of  it  brought  to  market  from  the  1st  of  Au- 
gust to  the  first  of  October  omitted,  and  a  like  portion  of  the  sub- 
sequent calendar  year  included.  The  50  to  90  millions  of  pounds 
are  the  quantity  consumed  at  home,  and  which  quantity  lessens 
in  amount  as  we  go  back  to  the  periods  when  our  manufactures 
were  fewer,  and  when  we  consumed  in  them  some  cotton  of 
foreign  growth.  See  another  estimate  in  the  3d  volume  of  the 
Parliamentary  Reports,  (1833,)  page  89.  Another  difference 
may  arise  from  the  bale  made  up  here  being  abroad  computed 
often  at  only  300  pounds,  ( see  on  this  ante  and  post. )  The 
crop  in  the  United  States  in  1834  was  injured  in  the  northern 
parts  of  the  cotton-growing  States  ;  but  so  much  new  land  was 
put  into  cultivation,  that  the  whole  exports  were  a  little  larger, 
and  the  home  consumption  is  presumed  also  to  have  been  more. 
The  crop  for  the  year  1835  has  likewise  been  more  seriously 
injured  in  the  same  quarters;  but  the  exports  of  it  since  Sep- 
tember, have,  from  early  ripening,  high  prices,  &c.,  been  larger 
than  either  of  the  two  previous  years,  and  some  think  the  whole 


16 

crop  was  larger,  while  it  is  believed  by  a  few  that  the  whole 
crop  will  turn  out  to  be  somewhat  less,  though  not  so  much  as 
apprehended,  the  increase  of  lands  in  cultivation  has  been  so 
great.  February  17,  1836,  the  exports  ascertained,  on  the  At- 
lantic, had  been  377,420  bags;  but  to  same  time  in  1835,  only 
340,379  ;  and  in  1834,  only  309,976.  For  a  view  of  our  power 
in  the  United  States  to  grow  more  cotton,  see  table  B,  note  [2.] 

[4.]  The  crop  of  Brazil  is  computed  on  its  ascertained  ex- 
ports at  different  periods  to  England  and  elsewhere,  and  a  home 
consumption  in  a  small  ratio  to  its  population.  (See  table  on 
exports.)  It  has  been  diminished  of  late  years  by  importing 
cotton  manufactures  for  home  consumption,  as  in  1833  and  '4, 
from  England  largely.  See  tables  N  and  0,  and  notes,  and 
Pitkin,  384  and  '5,  where  are  more  details.  Cotton  was  first 
planted  or  cultivated  in  Brazil  in  1781,  for  exportation.  Smith- 
ers'  History  of  Liverpool. 

[5.]  The  crop  of  the  West  Indies  is  estimated  in  a  similar 
manner  ;  after  deducting  from  their  exports  the  probable  portion 
of  cotton  brought  there  from  the  Spanish  Main,  and  thence  re- 
exported. In  1812,  it  is  said  that  the  crop  of  all  the  West  Indies 
did  not  exceed  5i  millions,  (Colquhoun  378;)  and  chiefly  in 
Barbadoes,  Bahama  islands,  Dominico,  and  Granada ;  4  Hum- 
boldt's Per.  Nar.  123  to  '5,  and  notes.  But  this  is  believed  to 
have  been  underrated.  England  now  exports  there  largely  of 
cotton  manufactures.  See  1833  and  1834,  table  N,  and  notes; 
and  the  United  States  export  there  some  of  them  yearly,  as  well 
as  France.  All  this  tends  to  diminish  the  crop  raised  for  home 
consumption,  and  probably  that  for  export.  See  exports  of  Mfts. 
table  O.  Cotton  was  grown  first  in  1776,  at  St.  Domingo,  for 
export.  2  V.  Hist,  of  Colom.  But  earlier  in  other  islands,  and 
they  furnished  a  large  part  of  English  wants  before  1785;  Edin. 
Cyclop.  Art.  ''Cotton."  In  1789,  Hayti,  alone,  exported 
over  7  millions  of  pounds;  about  2i  millions  of  pounds  in  1801, 
and  since  that,  less  than  1  million  of  pounds  yearly.  See  a  table 
in  McCulloch,  926.  In  1824,  a  little  over  1  million  of  pounds, 
and  in  1832  about  H  million.     See  McCulloch,  927. 

[6.]  The  supposed  crop  of  Egypt,  in  former'years,  is  predi- 
cated on  the  authority  of  the  Dictionary  of  Spanish  Commerce 
and  Finance,  vol.  3,  page  29.  On  her  exports,  (see  exports,) 
and  for  1834,  the  New  Monthly  Magazine  for  September,  1835. 
She  imported  cotton  from  Smyrna  and  Greece  till  within  twenty 


17 

years.  See  below,  note  9th.  By  the  last  advices  her  crop 
grown  in  1835  is  said  to  be  short,  not  exceeding  18  or  20  mil- 
lions of  pounds. 

[7.]  The  crop  of  the  rest  of  Africa  is  computed  from  her  ex- 
ports from  Morocco,  Gambia,  &c.,  and  the  habits  and  number  of 
her  population,  and  her  soil  and  climate,  where  cotton  is  indige- 
nous, and  has  always  been  grown  in  many  sections  since  first 
discovered.  McGuUoch,  Die.  436.  Of  late  she  imports  on  the 
eastern  side  fewer  cotton  goods  from  India,  and  more  there  and 
on  the  western  side  from  England  and  the  United  States.  See 
for  1833  and  '4,  from  Eng.  table  N,  and  notes.  See  exports  from 
the  United  States,  table  O.  In  the  island  of  Mauritius,  in  1806, 
nearly  two  millions  of  pounds  of  cotton  were  raised,  but  it  fell  off 
gradually  till,  in  1831,  little  or  none  was  produced.  4  Mont- 
gomery's Hist,  of  British  Col.,  page  209.  See  table  N,  note  [10.] 

[8.]  In  India,  the  estimate  rests  on  her  exports  and  vast  pop- 
ulation, long  clothed  chiefly  in  cotton  of  her  own  growth.  Mc- 
Culloch,  Die.  437.  The  Isle  of  Bourbon  produced  it  of  a  quality 
almost  equal  to  the  Sea-island.  London  Encyclop.  Art.  "  Cot- 
ton." See  her  exports,  table  D.  But  of  late  years  her  exports 
of  manufactured  goods  have  declined,  and  her  importations  of 
them  from  England  alone  exceed  ^10,000,000  yearly.  See 
exports  of  manufactures  from  England  and  the  United  States, 
table  N  and  O,  and  evidence  on  the  East  India  Company,  1832, 
appendix,  page  287  ;  and  on  the  growth  and  use  of  cotton  in  the 
islands  of  the  Indian  archipelago,  see  1  Crawford,  History,  177, 
207,  and  449  ;  2  Crawford,  360.  It  is  believed  that  the  culti- 
vation of  cotton  for  export  is  on  the  increase  ;  labor  is  so  low,  and 
the  trade  of  India  having  become  more  free.  The  estimates  for 
the  crop  in  India  are  probably  not  high  enough,  rather  than 
being  too  large.  See  exports,  table  E  and  F,  and  supplement 
to  Cyclop.  Brit.  "  Cotton." 

[9.]  The  rest  of  Asia,  including  China,  Japan,  Persia,  Arabia, 
and  Turkey,  from  the  mildness  of  its  climate,  great  population, 
and  customary  clothing,  is  supposed  not  to  be  computed  too  high. 
In  1766,  it  was  grown  much  about  Smyrna.  See  Postlethwait's 
Dictionary,  "  Cotton."  Only  about  six  millions  of  pounds  in 
1834,  near  Smyrna,  and  most  of  that  was  shipped  to  Marseilles 
and  Trieste.     McCuUoch,  page  1069. 

The  cultivation  of  cotton,  in  China,  began  about  the  13th 
century,  for  purposes  of  manufacture;  though  before  raised  in 
3 


18 

gardens  for  ornament.  The  crop  increased  rapidly,  and  was 
very  large,  probably  much  beyond  the  amount  assigned  in  this 
column,  till  1785  to  1790,  when  it  began  to  be  considerably  dis- 
continued for  the  purpose  of  raising  grain,  during  and  in  conse- 
quence of  famine.  Much  has  since  been  imported  from  India, 
though  now  in  the  small  statistical  knowledge  attainable  on  this 
point  as  to  China,  she  may  raise  more  cotton  than  the  large  amount 
computed  for  her,  in  connexion  with  Japan,  Cochin-China,  &c. 
Supplement  to  Cyclop.  Brit.  "  Cotton."  See  exports  of  raw 
cotton,  table  D.  Travellers  and  merchants  see  but  little  of  Chi- 
na usually,  except  the  south  parts  and  the  seaboard ;  and  if  in 
the  great  use  of  silk,  furs,  &c.  in  the  colder  portions,  it  is  con- 
sidered that  100  millions  of  her  population  use  cotton,  and  from 
their  poverty  only  li  pounds  each,  the  whole  amount-  would  be 
160  millions  of  pounds  yearly  in  China  alone. 

[10.]  This  crop  in  South  America  and  Mexico  rests  on  simi- 
lar principles,  as  the  chief  clothing  was  cotton  when  the  country 
was  first  discovered  by  the  Spaniards.  It  is  now  often  of  su- 
perior quality.  (See  Humboldt's  Per.  Nar.  page  202.)  The 
exports  since  have  been  considerable.  (See  exports.)  But  of 
late  years  the  crop  must  be  less,  as  Mexico,  as  well  as  Peru  and 
Chili  imports  now  from  England  yearly  many  cottons,  besides 
what  they  get  from  the  United  States  and  elsewhere.  ( See  ex- 
ports of  manufactures.)  Cotton  began  to  be  cultivated  for  ex- 
port in  Caraccas  in  1782.  The  saw  gin  is  not  yet  used,  but 
wooden  rollers.  2  Hist,  of  Colomb.  The  plant  is  found  indi- 
genous, (Mollier's  travels  in  Colombia,  page  121  ;  4  Humb.  Per. 
Nar.  123.)  In  Hall's  Colombia,  page  27,  it  is  said  only  about 
four  millions  of  pounds  are  grown  in  that  Government  yearly. 
This  is  too  small  an  amount.  Cultivated  in  Surinam  since  1735. 
Smithers'  Hist,  of  Liverpool,  page  131. 

[11.]  This  column  includes  some  remote  islands,  and  the 
south  of  Spain,  Italy,  and  Greece,  and  their  islands,  with  the  Ca- 
naries, where  cotton  was  formerly  more  raised,  and  still  is  con- 
siderably. See  as  to  Spain  and  Italy,  2  Chaptal  on  French  in- 
dustry, page  6.  From  Italy  and  Egypt,  in  1825,  when  cotton 
was  very  high,  over  231  millions  of  pounds  were  exported. 
McCuUoch,  949.  Some  has  been  raised  in  New  South  Wales. 
McCulloeh,  Diet,  of  Com.  436  ;  Smithers'  Hist,  of  Liverpool, 
page  126  ;  and  the  cultivation  is  said  to  be  resumed  in  Italy. 
Though  some  exports  were  formerly  described  as  from  Portugal, 
little  or  no  cotton  grew  there  ;  and  the  exports  of  it  thence  came 
chiefly  from  Brazil. 


19 

[12.]  Some  confusion  has  arisen  from  the  different  use  or  ap- 
plication of  the  word  "  cotton."  It  is  said  to  be  a  word  of  Arabic 
origin  (Smithers'  History  of  Liv.  115;)  but  the  application 
sometimes  of  the  word  "  linen,"  and  at  others  of  the  word  "  wool- 
len," to  the  vegetable  of  three  or  four  general  varieties,  and 
which  produces  the  wool  or  down  now  called  "  cotton,"  has  led 
to  some  mistakes  about  its  growth  and  use  formerly  in  certain 
countries,  which  it  is  now  difficult  to  correct.  McCulloch's  Diet, 
of  Com.  436  and  '8.  Baines,  287  and  '96,  note  66.  But  it  was 
probably  grown  and  used  largely  in  ancient  times  in  Arabia,  as 
well  as  India,  America,  and  Africa,  except  perhaps  in  Egypt, 
where  linen,  it  is  supposed,  chiefly  superseded  it,  and  can  now 
be  detected,  but  no  cotton,  in  the  clothing  of  the  mummies,  by 
the  joints  in  the  fibres  of  the  stalk  of  the  flax,  being  visible  with 
a  microscope,  whereas  the  fibres  of  cotton  from  the  pod  have  no 
joints.  See  Thompson's  paper  in  Baines's  appendix.  London 
Encyclop.  article  "  Cotton,"  contra.  The  kind  of  cotton  chiefly 
cultivated  now,  and  especially  in  the  United  States,  is  not  the 
tree  or  shrub,  but  the  annual  and  herbaceous  varieties.  London 
Encyclop.  art.  "  Cotton." 


20 


B. 


COTTON— RAW. 


Crop  grown  in— [1]— [2] 


1789 
1790 
1791 
1792 
1793 
1794 
1795 
1796 
1797 
1798 
1799 
1800 
1801 
1802 
1803 
1804 
1805 
1806 
1807 
1808 
1809 
1810 
1811 
1812 
1813 
1814 
1815 
1816 
1817 
1818 
1819 
1820 
1821 
1822 
1823 
1824 
1825 


c4 

ei 

C 

'o 

"c 

• 

•> 

t- 

w 

c 

e« 

.3 

O 

U 

d 

d 

S 

CO 

c 

C 

OS 

c 

o 

3 

r 

:2 

c 
C 

.S2 

> 

^ 

cn 

O 

&^ 

< 

h 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 
Mill's. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

- 

- 

1^ 

•^ 

5 

4 

20 

10 

- 

- 

1 

8 

7 

40 

20 

- 

- 

3 

2 

12 

10 

50 

45 

- 

20 

20 

10 

10 

lbs. 


Mill'n. 


21 


B.— COTTON— RAW— Continued. 


Crop  grown  in — [1] — [2] 


e4 

!* 

c 

C 

2 

■£ 

s 

1 

t 

4 

C 

en 

a 

c 
.2 

'3 

> 

:zi 

en 

O 

p^ 

< 

H 

S 

^ 

< 

s 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

>^ 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Miirn. 

1826 

25 

18 

70 

75 

2 

45 

45 

30 

38 

i 

1827 

1828 

1829 

1830 

1831 

1832 

1833 

13 

10 

73 

88 

15 

65 

50 

70 

55 

i 

1834 

10 

9^ 

651 

75 

20 

85 

45 

85 

62 

i 

1835 

[4] 

[3] 

[1.]  I  have  not  been  able  to  find  any  official  returns  of  either 
the  General  or  the  State  Governments,  which  give  the  crops  of 
cotton  in  each  State.  The  present  table  has,  therefore,  been 
compiled  from  the  best  data  in  my  power:  such  as  the  foreign 
exports  of  cotton  from  each  State,  the  exports  coastwise,  the 
quantity  supposed  to  be  exported  from  each  not  grown  within 
its  limits,  and  the  amount  yearly  consumed  within  its  limits. 
Many  mistakes  are  made  abroad,  and  some  at  home,  by  consid- 
ering all  the  exports  of  each  State  as  its  own  crop,  or  by  com- 
puting the  whole  foreign  exports  as  the  whole  crop,  or  by  esti- 
mating all  the  bales  in  the  United  States  alike,  and  only  at  300 
pounds  on  an  average.  See  such  mistakes  in  Reuss's  Tables 
on  American  Trade,  270,  and  Parliamentary  Evidence  on  Man- 
ufactures, A.  D.  1833. 

But  it  is  well  known  in  this  country,  that  the  exports  from 
New  Orleans,  both  foreign  and  domestic,  are  composed  in  part 
of  the  crops  of  Louisiana,  Arkansas,  Tennessee,  Mississippi, 
and  Alabama.  Part  of  the  crops  in  each  of  those  States  is  con- 
sumed at  home,  part  is  exported  coastwise  to  the  Northern  States, 
and  the  crops  of  the  southwestern  portion  of  Mississippi,  and 


22 

the  southern  portion  of  Alabama,  are  chiefly  exported  from  Mo- 
bile. In  addition  to  some  of  the  above  remarks,  applicable  to 
the  other  cotton-growing  States,  it  is  proper  to  add,  that  part  of 
the  crop  of  Georgia  is  exported  from  Florida,  and  part  from 
South  Carolina ;  part  of  Florida  from  Alabama ;  and  part  of 
North  Carolina  from  Virginia. 

For  an  explanation  of  some  of  the  fluctuations  in  our  exports 
in  certain  years,  see  table  A,  note  [3]. 

[2.]  From  data  given  under  the  head  of  "  Capital,"  in  table 
C,  note  [3],  it  will  be  seen  that,  in  producing  the  whole  cotton 
crop  of  the  United  States,  only  about  two  millions  of  acres  of 
land  are  cultivated.  In  table  D  it  appears  that  all  the  foreign 
exports  of  cotton  in  the  world  do  not  probably  exceed  535  mil- 
lions of  pounds,  and  of  which  the  United  States  now  export  about 
384  millions  of  pounds ;  a  large  portion  of  the  residue  is  from 
the  remotest  parts  of  Asia,  very  little  of  it  now  coming  to 
Europe.  But  if  necessary  or  profitable,  we  could  raise  the 
whole  of  the  other  150  millions,  by  putting  into  cultivation  only 
about  500,000  acres  more  cotton  land,  and  employing  less  than 
100,000  more  field  hands  in  this  branch  of  industry. 

But  supposing  that  Asia,  from  her  distance  and  habits,  con- 
tinues to  use  chiefly  her  own  raw  cotton,  that  the  increase  of 
population  in  j;he  United  States  should  continue  much  as  hereto- 
fore, and  that  the  countries  in  Europe  and  elsewhere,  now  sup- 
plied with  cotton  manufactures  made  chiefly  from  our  crops, 
should  increase  in  population,  or  in  the  use  of  cotton,  as  fast  as 
the  United  States  does  in  population  alone,  and  there  would  be 
required  to  supply  the  increased  annual  demand  only  about  21 
millions  of  pounds  more  of  raw  cotton,  or  the  product  in  the 
United  States  of  less  than  70,000  acres  more  each  year.  This 
has  been  nearly  our  average  increase  of  crops  in  the  last  ten 
years.  See  table  and  note  in  extract  from  annual  Treasury  re- 
port. It  has  required  about  1 1 ,000  more  field  laborers  a  year, 
or  only  Ath  the  annual  increase  of  our  whole  population.  But 
we  probably  have  now,  not  in  cultivation,  more  acres  of  land 
suitable  for  cotton,  than  would  be  sufiicient  to  raise  all  the  cotton 
now  grown  in  the  world ;  as  that  would  require  only  three  to 
five  millions  of  acres.  Hence,  it  must  be  obvious  that  there  is 
good  cotton  land  enough  in  the  United  States,  and  at  low  prices, 
easily  to  grow,  not  only  all  the  cotton  wanted  for  foreign  export 
in  the  worlds  but  to  supply  the  increased  demand  for  it,  proba- 
bly, for  ages. 

The  only  preventive,  of  which  there  is   much  likelihood, 


23 

seems  to  be  in  the  augmented  price  of  such  labor  as  is  usually 
devoted  to  this  culture ;  so  that  it  may  not  be  possible  to  raise 
the  crop  at  so  low  a  rate  as  to  keep  possession  of  the  European 
market  against  all  competition. 

In  getting  possession  of  that  market  so  fully  and  rapidly  here- 
tofore, (as  shown  in  the  extracts  from  the  last  annual  report,) 
the  United  States  have  been  much  aided  by  the  good  quality  of 
their  cotton,  the  low  price  of  land,  and  the  great  improvements 
in  cleaning  cotton  by  Whitney's  cotton  gin  since  1793.  One  per- 
son is  able  to  perform  with  it  in  a  day  the  work  of  1,000  without 
it.  Cox's  Digest  of  Manufactures,  page  667  ;  Gales  and  Seaton's 
documents,  2d  volume.  Besides  these  advantages,  the  unusual 
industry  and  enterprise  of  our  population,  and  its  freedom  from 
taxation  compared  with  the  people  of  most  other  countries,  and 
the  wide  extent  of  our  commerce,  have  promoted  our  unprece- 
dented progress.  Raines's  History,  301  ;  5  Malte  Brun,  page 
193. 

The  old  mode  of  cleaning  it  by  wooden  rollers,  and  with  the 
bow  by  hand,  is  still  used  in  India  and  Colombia,  and  it  is  there 
sown  broad-cast  instead  of  in  drills,  and  much  neglected  after- 
wards.    Baines  64  :  see  3  Crawford's  history,  350. 

The  great  vibrations  in  the  prices  per  pound  of  raw  cotton 
grown  in  the  United  States,  are  very  striking,  as  exhibited  in 
table  C.  The  influence  of  these  on  the  sales  of  public  land 
and  our  revenue,  from  both  them  and  the  imports  of  foreign 
merchandise,  has  been  briefly  examined  in  the  last  annual  re- 
port, extracts  from  which  are  annexed.  The  further  influence 
of  these  on  the  prosperity  of  the  South,  on  the  rise  in  the  value 
of  their  slave  property,  and  on  the  great  profits  yielded  by  all 
their  capital  invested  in  growing  cotton,  must  be  very  apparent 
to  every  careful  observer.  The  single  fact,  that  in  no  year  has 
the  price  been  but  a  fraction  below  10  cents  per  pound,  or  a 
rate  sufficient  to  yield  a  fair  profit,  while  it  has,  at  times,  been 
as  high  as  29,  34,  and  even  44,  and  been  on  an  average  over  16 
cents  per  pound  since  1802,  and  over  21  since  1790,  is  probably 
without  a  parallel,  in  showing  a  large  and  continued  profit.  Fur- 
ther details  on  these  and  similar  considerations  must  be  left  to 
other  persons  and  other  occasions.     [See  table  C,  note  3.] 

[3.]  In  South  Carolina,  Georgia,  and  Florida,  the  Sea-island 
cotton  (supposed  to  have  come  originally  from  Persia,  and  in 
1786  from  Bahama  to  the  United  States)  succeeds;  but  grows 
there  to  perfection  only  in  certain  districts  near  the  seacoast. 
During  the  last  30  years  the  average  annual  crop  has  been  be- 


24 

tween  9  and  1 1  million  pounds.  See  exports  and  prices,  and  a 
table  in  Seybert,  152-3:  Sinithers,  132.  But  the  quality  of  a 
part  of  it  is  inferior.  McCulloch,  436.  It  has  taken  the  place 
in  Europe  of  the  fine  cotton  from  the  isle  of  Bourbon.  London 
Encyclopedia,  article  "  cotton  ;"  and  is  superior  to  that.  Sup- 
plement to  Cyclop.  Brit.  "  cotton." 

[4.]  The  growth  of  cotton  in  the  United  States  began  as  early 
as  1787,  even  of  the  Sea-island,  and  of  other  kinds  earlier  still, 
in  small  quantities.  McCulloch,  440,  says  it  began  soon  after 
the  close  of  the  war  of  the  Revolution,  though  not  exported  till 
1790. 

T.  Cox,  cited  in  Rees's  Cyclopedia,  in  article  "  United 
States,"  says  cotton  was  raised  here  in  gardens  before  1786,  but 
not  by  planters  as  a  crop,  and  before  1787  we  never  exported  a 
bale.  [He  means  of  our  own  growth,  it  is  presumed.  See 
table  F,  note  6.]  We  exported  a  little  before  1787,  viz  :  1785, 
five  bags  ;  and  in  1786  six  bags ;  which  Smithers'  history  of  Liv- 
erpool, page  129,  supposes  was  grown  here,  but  see  table  F, 
note  9. 


26 


C. 


COTTON— RAW. 


Prices  per  lb.  [1] 

Capital  employed 

Persons  employed 

Value  of 

in  connexion  with 

in  growing,  and 

whole  crop  in 

growing.  [3] 

dependent. 

t 

a; 

<u 

»; 

w 

C/3 

T3 

B 

00 

B 

00 

a> 

1 

•2! 

C 

ho 

a. 

*N 

Ti 
ii 

9^ 

•T3 

Si 

c 

c 

"c 

bo 

t. 

c 

tn 

c 

c/l 

aS 

p 

W 

tJ 

H 

m 

t) 

5 

p 

M 

i 

Cents. 

Pence. 

Dolls. 

Dolls. 

Dolls. 

Dolls. 

Dolb. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Mill'ns. 

Mill'ns, 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

1789 

_ 

12  to  22 

1790 

14J 

12  to  21 

1791 

26 

13  to  30 

^ 

_ 

33 

'^  u 

1 

~k 

40^ 

1792 

29 

20  to  30 

1793 

32 

13  to  22 

1794 

33 

12  to  18 

1795 

36^ 

15  to  27 

1796 

36^ 

12  to  29 

1797 

34 

12  to  37 

1798 

39 

22  to  45 

1799 

44 

17  to  60 

1800 

28 

16  to  36 

1801 

44 

17  to  38 

80 

_ 

50 

.  X. 
1  u 

i 

8 

39^ 

1802 

19 

12  to  38 

1803 

19 

8  to  15 

1804 

20 

10  to  18 

1805 

23 

14  to  19 

1806 

22 

12  to  15 

1807 

21^ 

10  to  14 

1808 

19 

9  to  30 

1809 

16 

10  to  18 

1810 

16 

10  to  19 

1811 

I5i 

7  to  14 

134 

-1.. 

1  0 

58 

} 

I 

12^ 

37 

1812 

10^ 

11  to  14 

1813 

12 

16  to  26 

1814 

15 

28  aver. 

1815 

21 

20i  " 

1816 

29^ 

18i  «« 

1817 

26i 

20     '« 

1818 

34 

20     *« 

1819 

24 

13i  " 

1820 

17 

11^  - 

1821 

16 

9|   *• 

300 

^   . 

83 

i 

i 

29| 

37 

1822 

16^ 

8i  «* 

1823 

10&12 

8}  " 

1824 

15 

8|  ** 

27 


C— COTTON— RAW— Continued. 


Prices  per  lb.  [1] 

Capital  employed 

Persons  employed 

Value  of 

in  connexion  with 

in  growing,  and 

whole  crop  in 

growing.  [3] 

dependent. 

lA 

tA 

to 

en 

B 

ii 

OJ 

O) 

rt 

rf 

rt 

aj 

5 

<i» 

*j 

*j 

?^ 

J' 

C« 

13 

CD 

(XI 

t; 

02 

Pi 

ro 

5 

TS 

• 

. 

T3 

.r: 

-a 

J= 

<u 

43 

O 

el- 

ns 

(U 

^ 

(U 

^ 

bn 

s'-. 

N 

<u 

••-< 

« 

'c 

c 

3 

biO 

s 

'c 

en 

'£ 

CO 

. 

D 

M 

t) 

« 

P3 

tJ 

w 

P 

•5 

2 

a 

Cents. 

Pence. 

Dolls. 

Dolls. 

Dolls. 

DoUs. 

Dolls. 

Mill's, 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Millions. 

Millions. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

1825 

21 

11^  aver. 

1826 

11 

6|    - 

1827 

9i 

6^    «* 

, 

1828 

m 

6|    " 

1829 

10 

5|    - 

1830 

10 

61    " 

1831 

H 

5f    «' 

650 

30 

58 

i 

jL 

38^ 

29i 

1832 

10 

6t    " 

1833 

11 

rg  ** 

1834 

13 

8i    <* 

_ 

- 

- 

_ 

ttol 

76 

36i 

1835 

16^ 

12^    " 

800 

31 

50 

1 

[2] 

[3] 

[4] 

[5] 

[I.]  From  1802  to  1826,  inclusive,  the  prices  for  the  United 
States  are  taken  from  Marshall's  tables,  page  110.  Since  that 
date,  from  official  returns. 

The  prices,  given  for  the  United  States,  are  those  at  the 
places  of  exportation,  and  are  the  average  during  the  year,  and 
including  all  kinds  of  cotton  :  but  the  Sea-island  cotton  is  worth 
usually  two  hundred  and  fifty  per  cent,  more  than  the  other 
kinds  (see  below  in  note  2  ;)  and  formerly  the  difference  was 
still  greater,  when  the  amount  grown  elsewhere  was  not  so  large. 
The  "price  of  cotton  for  1790  is  from  the  Treasury  report,  15th 
February,  1791.  The  prices  from  1791  to  1801,  inclusive,  are 
from  Almy  and  Brown's  books,  at  Providence,  deducting  one 
cent,  per  pound  for  freight,  &c.  The  prices  of  raw  cotton  from 
1789  to  1802,  in  the  United  States,  fluctuated  largely,  and  are 
quoted  somewhat  differently  in  some  of  the  prices  current  dur- 
ing those  years.  See  the  United  States  Gazette  and  Pennsyl- 
vania Mercury  for  that  period.  But  the  differences  are  not 
great  if  an  average  be  taken  for  the  whole  year. 


28 

Where  rich  lands  and  labor  were  low,  as  in  Mississippi  and 
Alabama  a  few  years  ago,  two  cents  per  pound  for  cotton  in  the 
seed,  or  eight  cents  when  cleaned,  would  pay  expenses.  It  is 
supposed  to  be  a  profitable  crop  in  the  Southwestern  States  at 
ten  cents  per  pound.  In  Baines's  history  of  cotton,  page  316, 
it  is  stated  that  the  planter  can  make  a  profit  at  six  cents  per 
pound. 

In  India  the  Bengal  cotton  of  inferior  quality,  it  is  said,  can 
be  raised  for  three  cents  per  pound,  and  delivered  in  England 
for  five  cents.  See  evidence  on  East  India  Company,  1832," 
page  286,  appendix;  Smithers'  history  of  Liverpool,  116.  It 
has  since  been  said  that  it  will  cost  five  cents  per  pound  to  de- 
liver it  on  the  wharves  at  Bombay.  It  sold  in  India  in  1831 
and  1832  at  eight  to  nine  cents  per  pound.  See  McCuUoch's 
Dictionary,  page  238.  In  1820,  in  3  Crawford's  history  351,  it 
is  said  to  bring  from  eight  to  nine  cents  in  the  Indian  islands. 

[2.]  The  prices  in  England  are  given  in  pence,  as  they  are  so 
much  oftener  referred  to  in  that  form,  but  can  easily  be  con- 
verted into  cents ;  estimating  the  pound  sterling  at  ^4.80  ;  by 
doubling  the  number  of  pence.  They  are  generally  the  prices 
at  Liverpool ;  and  from  1793  to  1797,  and  from  1799  to  1814, 
are  from  Tooke  on  Prices,  page  11,  appendix;  and  are  of 
"Georgia  bowed  cotton,"  without  the  duty.  The  rest,  except 
from  1789  to  1793,  and  1834  and  1835,  are  from  Marshall's 
tables,  page  114;  and  Baines,  page  352-3;  differing  in  some 
cases  a  little,  and  in  Marshall  giving  the  prices  of  each  kind  of 
cotton  separately.  See  a  table  in  Smithers'  history  of  Liver- 
pool, page  149.  Those  from  1789  to  1793  are  from  Baines, 
page  313,  and  are  of  West  India  cotton ;  and  for  1834  and  1835, 
the  Liverpool  repotts  have  been  the  guide. 

As  an  illustration  of  the  difference  in  value  of  different  kinds 
of  raw  cotton,  I  annex  a  statement  of  their  prices  at  Liverpool, 
June  16,  1835: 

Uplands     -  -  -  -  from  lOrf.  to  12^rf. 

Orleans      -  -  -  -  from  10    to  13 

Alabama    -  -  _  .  fi-om    9^  to  12^ 

Sea-island  -  -  -  from  23    to  34 

Brazil        -  -  -  -  from  13f  to  16 

Surats        -  -  -  -  from    7   to  8^ 

Bengal       -  -  -  '  -  from    7^ 

Laguyra     -  -  -  -  from  13^^  to  14 

West  Indies  .  ^  .  from  12^  to  Hi 


29 

See  rnoie  on  prices  in  Edinburgh  Review,  427,  (1832.)  Mc- 
Culloch,  page  437,  441.  The  finest  kinds  of  Sea-island  often 
bring  four  times  as  much  as  the  inferior  qualities.  McCulloch, 
page  437.  In  1799  it  sold  in  Liverpool  for  five  shillings  per 
pound.  Smithers,  page  156.  At  Smyrna,  before  1767,  the  price 
of  common  cotton  appears  to  have  been  six  or  seven  cents  per 
pound.  Postlethvvait's  Dictionary.  At  the  river  Gambia  the  price 
per  pound  is  about  four  cents.  Montgomery's  colonial  history.  In 
Demarara  the  price  (in  1815  j  is  said  to  average  about  nine  to  ten 
cents  per  pound.  Edinburgh  Encyclopedia,  article  "  cotton." 
In  Colombia  in  1822  the  price  per  pound  was  about  the  same  as 
in  the  United  States,  but  it  fluctuates  there  and  in  other  Spanish 
American  Governments  from  eight  to  fifteen  cents  a  pound,  with 
the  quality  and  the  year.    See  Humboldt  and  Mollier's  Travels. 

[3.]  Capital.  The  capital  employed  in  growing  cotton,  with 
the  income  it  yields,  is  a  question  of  much  interest  and  impor- 
tance. But  very  little  can  be  found  concerning  it  in  books,  and 
the  information  obtained  on  it  from  different  correspondents  in 
the  United  States  is  defective,  and  is  founded  on  quite  different 
data  in  diflerent  States  and  by  different  persons. 

The  elements  of  any  computation  must  be  the  average  cost 
per  acre  of  cotton  lands,  wild  or  cleared,  and  if  the  former,  the 
expense  of  clearing  them ;  the  amount  of  labor  necessary  per 
acre  to  produce  a  given  quantity  of  raw  cotton  ;  the  cost  of  labor, 
whether  in  the  form  of  wages  or  otherw  ise  ;  the  expense  of  tools, 
horses,  &c.  with  salaries  of  overseers,  taxes  paid,  &c. 

One  mode  of  making  the  computation  is  as  follows  :  The  aver- 
age cost  of  cotton  lands  when  wild,  in  the  old  States,  did  not 
probably  exceed  often  half  a  dollar  per  acre,  including  fees  for 
patents,  &c.  In  the  new  States  it  has  generally  ranged  from 
$1.25  to  ^20  per  acre,  depending  on  its  quality,  location, 
and  the  price  of  cotton.  The  actual  settlers,  in  purchasing  of 
capitalists,  have  generally  been  compelled  to  give  an  advance 
from  50  to  100  per  cent. ;  some  times  much  more. 

The  expense  of  clcaiing  wild  land  averages  from  ten  to  fifteen 
dollars  per  acre.  Land  in  a  condition  to  be  cultivated,  will,  on 
an  average,  in  the  United  States,  yield  from  250lbs.  to  300lbs. 
of  clean  cotton.  In  the  old  States,  125lbs.  clean,  or  500lbs.  in 
the  seed  is  an  ordinary  crop.  ( Cooper's  Political  Economy,  p. 
96.)  Cox,  in  1810,  estimated  it  at  1381bs.  and  others  at  120lbs. 
(Rees's  Cyclopedia,  article  "  United  States.") 

It  is  believed  that  one  field  hand  or  laborer,  with  the  aid  here- 
after named,  can  cultivate  on  an  average  eight  acres.     Some  say 


30 

five  to  seven,  and  others  ten.  He  will  at  the  same  time  assist 
in  raising  five  to  eight  acres  of  corn. 

It  is  usual  to  employ  in  this  business  slave  labor,  and  the  next 
element  in  the  calculation  must  be  the  capital  invested  in  slaves 
for  this  purpose,  and  the  annual  cost  of  their  maintenance. 

The  price  of  field  hands  has  nearly  or  quite  doubled  in  ten 
years ;  and  they  now  often  cost  eight  hundred  or  one  thousand 
dollars,  when  formerly  four  and  five  hundred  dollars  were  the 
usual  rate  each. 

The  maintenance  of  them  is  another  item  very  differently 
computed.  Sometimes  it  is  done  by  the  purchase  of  more  land 
and  cultivating  it,  putting  stock  on  it  of  cows,  sheep,  &c.  so  as, 
with  the  aid  of  other  slaves,  kept  partly  for  that  purpose  and 
partly  for  the  culture  of  cotton,  to  raise  corn,  pork,  &c.  to  feed, 
and  other  materials  to  clothe  the  whole.  In  such  case  the  ad- 
ditional land  put  in  cultivation,  the  additional  slaves  bought,  and 
the  stock  on  the  plantation,  &c.  must  be  considered  as  so  much 
more  capital. 

The  additional  slaves  in  such  case,  being  more  youthful,  or 
more  aged  ones,  or  infirm  females,  may  be  fairly  computed  at 
an  equal  number  with  the  field  hands,  but  costing  only  about 
half  the  price.  The  additional  land  should  be  for  cultivation, 
about  twenty  acres  for  each  field  hand.  The  capital  in  oxen, 
horses,  sheep,  tools  for  husbandry,  &c.,  about  thirty  dollars  to 
each  slave  on  the  plantation. 

To  these  must  be  added  the  capital  which  may  be  deemed 
temporary,  and  not  as  a  permanent  investment,  and  hence  is  to 
be  all  yearly  returned,  such  as  expense  for  extra  clothing  not 
made  on  the  plantation,  for  medicine,  overseers,  tools  for  labor, 
taxes,  freight,  &c.,  which  may  be  forty-five  dollars  to  each  slave. 

Dilifering  from  these  last  data,  in  some  respects,  in  substance, 
and  wholly  unlike  in  form,  is  another  mode  of  computing  all  the 
capital  invested  except  that  in  the  mere  cotton  lands.  Instead 
of  estimating  the  price  of  slaves,  &c.  it  may  be  considered  that 
slave  labor  could  be  hired,  with  food,  clothing,  medicine,  &c. 
at  a  cost  for  each  field  hand  from  one  hundred  to  one  hundred 
and  twenty  dollars  per  year.  That  from  thirty  to  forty  dollars 
each  would  defray  the  annual  expense  of  overseers,  tools,  horses 
for  each,  and  that  the  additional  and  equal  number  of  slaves,  not 
prime  field  hands,  could  be  hired  and  supported  for  less  than 
half  the  annual  cost  of  the  others. 

On  these  data  the  cotton  crop,  as  estimated  for  1835,  at  480 
million  pounds,  would  grow  on  1,600,000  acres,  at  SOOlbs.  per 
acre,  or  1,920,000  at  2501bs.  each.     Considering  that  some  lands 


31 

wear  out  quick  and  are  changed,  probably  the  whole  quantity 
cultivated  for  cotton  in  the  United  States,  at  this  time,  should 
be  estimated  at  two  millions  or  more  of  acres. 

From  the  above  elements  the  whole  capital  invested  in 
growing  the  cotton  crop  in  the  United  States  can  be  readily 
computed.  On  one  hypothesis,  converting  the  whole  capital 
into  that  which  is  permanent,  and  partly  invested  in  lands,  slaves, 
and  tools,  as  fixed  capital,  and  partly  invested  in  bank  or  other 
stocks,  or  in  loans  so  as  to  yield  an  income,  and  not  a  capital 
sufficient  to  defray  those  kinds  of  expenses  which  are  usually 
deemed  temporary,  and  are  yearly  remunerated,  or  require  what 
is  called  a  circulating  or  floating  capital,  and  the  whole  will 
amount  to  more  than  900  millions  of  dollars.  On  another  hy- 
pothesis, considering  the  capital,  as  it  generally  is,  divided  into 
fixed  and  ciiculating ;  the  capital  as  fixed,  which  is  invested  in 
lands,  slaves,  stocks  of  horses,  tools,  &c.  and  only  about  thirty 
millions  of  dollars  for  other  expenses,  as  circulating  or  tempo- 
rary, and  to  be  itself,  and  not  its  income  or  interest,  used  and 
repaid  yearly,  and  the  whole  capital  of  both  kinds  will  not  quite 
equal  800  million  dollars. 

This  last  amount  accords  nearly  with  a  still  different  mode  of 
testing  the  quantity  of  capital,  by  supposing  that  the  whole  crop 
of  480  million  pounds,  at  ten  cents  per  pound,  being  48  million 
dollars,  would  yield  six  per  cent,  on  all  the  money  invested  in 
any  way  in  raising  the  crop.  If  the  capital  used  was  all  per- 
manently invested,  it  would,  on  this  hypothesis,  amount  to  near 
800  million  dollars  ;  but  as  from  25  to  30  million  dollars  is  tem- 
porarily invested,  and  must  itself  be  repaid  yearly,  the  whole 
may,  in  the  usual  mode  of  treating  capital  employed  in  such 
business,  be  considered  rather  under  than  over  800  million 
dollars. 

That  amount,  however,  has  been  assumed  as  about  correct, 
in  the  table,  and  is  near  enough  for  the  estimate  and  comparisons 
at  different  periods  in  this  country,  and  at  the  same  period  be- 
tween this  and  other  countries.  In  others,  as  in  India,  Brazil, 
and  Egypt,  the  cost  of  labor  is  less,  and  perhaps  the  value  of 
land,  though  the  latter  is  doubtful ;  and  the  crop  per  acre,  and 
the  amount  of  labor  performed  by  each  hand,  are  believed  to  be 
less,  independent  of  the  failure  there  to  use  much  the  improved 
cotton  gin. 

Here,  at  250  pounds  per  acre  as  an  average  crop,  and  eight 
acres  an  average  cultivation  by  one  hand,  the  product  would  be 
2,000  pounds  per  hand,  or  at  ten  cents  per  pound,  would  be  the 
average  of  two  hundred  dollars  per  field  hand.     All  the  planter 


32 

obtains  over  ten  cents  per  pound  would  yield  him  a  large  rate 
of  interest  above  6  per  cent,  to  pay  for  the  greater  risk  and  un- 
certainty of  capital  invested  in  this  species  of  property.  (See 
table  B,  note  2.)  The  v»hole  crop  of  1834  was  probably  worth 
75  million  dollars  at  the  actual^market  prices,  though  at  10  cents 
per  pound  only  18  millions. 

It  is  difficult  to  institute  any  just  comparison  between  the 
profits  of  capital  invested  here  in  the  growing  of  cotton,  and  in 
the  manufacture  of  it;  as  in  the  latter  so  much  more  in  piopor- 
tion  is  invested  in  temporary  or  circulating  capital  to  pay  for 
wages  and  stock,  and  the  whole  of  which  is  to  be  annually  re- 
paid.    Neither  have  I  leisure  for  the  details. 

Indeed  it  might  have  comported  belter  with  the  technical 
language  of  political  economy  to  have  divided  the  whole  expen- 
ditures in  raising  cotton  into  three  heads,  viz  :  labor,  capital, 
and  land  ;  to  yield  in  return,  wages  for  the  labor,  profit  or  in- 
terest on  the  capital,  and  rent  for  the  land.  ( See  Senior's  Out^ 
line  of  Political  Economy,  page  1G5,  from  the  Encyclopedia 
Metropolitana.)  It  will  be  easy,  for  those  who  prefer  it,  to 
throw  the  calculation  into  that  form  ;  but  the  results  then,  would 
not  be  such  as  accord  best  w  ith  the  views  proposed  in  this  part 
of  the  table  C  ;  which  are,  to  present  to  the  community  here, 
in  plain  terms,  and  in  a  form  as  intelligible  as  possible  to  people 
at  large,  the  amount  of  capital  actually  employed  at  different  pe- 
riods in  growling  the  cotton  crop  in  the  United  Slates ;  whether 
invested  in  the  original  purchase  of  lands,  the  clearing,  or  the 
culture  of  them  ;  in  the  purchase  of  slaves,  or  in.  procuring  an 
income  for  the  payment,  or  in  the  actual  payment  of  wages  of 
free  labor  to  raise  the  crop ;  for  buying  seed,  tools,  food,  rai- 
ment, horses,  &c.  and  for  payment  of  taxes,  overseers,  or  any 
other  expense,  incidental  or  direct,  connected  with  the  produc- 
tion of  the  crop. 

Two  brief  statements  of  a  very  general  character  are  subjoin- 
ed, in  illustration  of  some  of  the  above  r^imarks. 
1st.  The  capital  invested  in  cotton   lands  under 
cultivation,    at  two    million    acres,    and  worth 
cleared,  on  an  average,  $20  per  acre,  is  -    $40,000,000 

The  capital  in  field  hands,  and  in  other  lands,  stock, 
labor,  &c.,  to  feed  and  clothe  them,  at  $100  per 
year,  on  340,000  in  number,  would  require  the 
interest  or  income  of  a  capital,  at  six  per  cent,  of  544,000,000 
The  maintenance  of  340,000  more  assistants,  &c. 
at  $30  each  per  year,  would  require  the  income 
of  a  capital  at  six  per  cent,  of  -  -     167,000,000 


33 

Amount  brought  over     -  $751,000,000 
The  capital  to  supply  enough  interest  or  income  to 
pay  for  tools,  horses  for  ploughing  cotton,  taxes, 
medicines,  overseers,  &c.  at  $30,  for  the  first 
340,000,  would  be        -  -  -  -    167,00a,000 


Making  in   all  a  permanent  capital,  if  so   used, 

equal  to  -  -  -  -  -  $918,000,000 

2d.     The  capital  in  cotton  lands,  as  stated  above    $40,000,000 

Capital  in  the  purchase  of  340,000  field  hands,  at 

$800  each,  on  an  average         -  -  -     272,000,000 

Capital  in  the  other  340,000  to  aid  and  to  raise 

food,  clothing,  &c.  at  half  price  -  -     136,000,000 

Capital  in  horses,  cattle,  sheep,  utensils,  &c.  for 
plantation,  about  $30  to  each  person,  to  aid  in 
making  food  and  clothing,  &c.  -  -       20,400,000 

Capital  in  other  lands,  to  support  stock,  raise  corn, 
&c.  at  20  acres  to  each  of  the  680,000,  worth 
$20  per  acre  cleared   -  -  -  -     272,000,000 

Capital,  temporary  or  floating,  to  buy  clothing  not 
made  on  plantation,  pay  taxes,  overseers,  freight, 
tools  for  cotton,  &c.  $45  to  each  -  -       30,600,000 


$771,000,000 

Making,  in  all,  about  $740,000,000  of  capital  permanently  in- 
verted or  fixed,  and  about  $30,000,000  temporarily  or  circula- 

The  crop  in  Demarara,  per  acre,  is  said  to  be  400  pounds 
clean.  Edinburgh  Encyclopedia,  article  "  Cotton,"  1815.  But, 
in  another  place,  the  crop  in  Guiana  is  computed,  on  an  average, 
at  only  200  pounds,  and  costs  14  cents  (or  Id.)  per  pound  to 
raise  it. 

The  capital,  per  acre,  invested  there  in  land,  buildings,  slaves, 
&c.  is  computed  for  1814,  at  about  $730,  which  is  nearly  double 
the  amount  computed  above  for  the  United  States.  ( See  same 
book.)  He  states  also  the  cost  of  cotton  land,  in  Louisiana,  at 
about  $124  per  acre  ;  slaves  at  $430  each,  and  assigns  30  for  a 
plantation  of  600  acres  and  over  ;  horses  and  sheep  for  same, 
costing  about  $2,250,  or  $75  for  each  slave.  Those  30  slaves 
will  raise  1,000  pounds  of  cotton  each,  (and,  it  is  presumed, 
maintain  themselves  from  the  land  not  in  cotton,  and  stock  on  it.) 
The  annual  expenses  of  overseers,  physician,  tools,  clothing  and 
5 


34 

taxes,  with  freight  of  cotton  to  market,  are  computed  at  about 
^1,350,  or  ^45  each  per  year;  which,  deducted  from  the  price 
of  the  cotton,  valued  at  21  cents  per  pound,  or  about  ^6,450, 
leaves  about  ^5,100  as  a  return  on  the  original  investment  of 
about  ^22,500,  (or  at  the  rate  of  nearly  25  per  cent.)  viz  : 

eOOacres,  at$12^  peracre  -  -  -  -     $7,600 

30  slaves,  at  $430  each        -  -  -  -      12,900 

Horses,  sheep,  &c.  -  -  -  -       2,250 


$22,650 


[4.]  The  number  of  persons  is  computed  on  similar  data  and 
principles  to  those  suggested  in  the  first  mode  of  estimating  the 
capital.  Some  allowances  are  made  in  certain  cases,  but  for 
comparison  there  has  been  preserved  similar  proportions  in  all 
the  years  for  which  the  computation  is  carried  out  in  the  table. 

Thus,  two  millions  of  acres,  at  one  field  hand  to  every  six 
acres,  would  require  about  340,000  laborers  ;  but  many  compute 
that  the  number  in  the  United  States  is  over  550,000,  who  are 
chiefly,  though  not  entirely,  engaged  in  field  labor.  Suppose 
the  whole  number  to  be  double  the  field  hands,  as  above  compu- 
ted, or  680,000,  who  are  engaged  in  field  labor,  picking  and 
otherwise  assisting  in  the  cultivation  of  cotton  and  corn,  and  the 
estimate  of  laborers  is  complete  at  about  680,000.  But  allow- 
ing that  a  number  more  should  be  added,  who  are  connected 
with  the  cultivators,  as  infirm  women,  very  young  children,  and 
too-aged  persons,  &c.  unable  to  labor  in  the  field,  besides  over- 
seers, owners  and  their  respective  families,  dependent  on  the 
cotton  crop,  and  it  is  presumed  that  then  a  million  of  persons 
would  be  considered  as  now  engaged  in  the  United  States,  di- 
rectly and  indirectly,  in  the  growing  of  cotton ;  but  the  actual 
laborers  are  only  about  two-thirds  of  that  number. 

The  numbers  are,  for  comparative  views,  in  all  other  coun- 
tries, stated  on  the  same  principle,  though  they  are  doubtless 
more,  in  most  nations,  to  raise  the  same  quantity  of  cotton  for 
reasons  too  obvious  for  recital,  and  especially  where  the  saw  gin 
and  horse  power  are  less  used. 

[5.]  The  whole  value  is  computed  from  the  quantity  of  the 
crop  in  any  particular  calendar  year,  and  the  price  it  bears  here 
the  next  calendar  and  fiscal  year,  which  is  the  time  most  of  it  is 
sold. 

The  whole  value  of  what  is  grown  elsewhere  is  computed 


35 


from  the  number  of  pounds,  as  estimated  in  table  A,  and  rating 
it,  on  an  average,  at  only  one-half  the  value  per  pound,  at  the 
different  periods  which  the  American  cotton,  on  an  average,  then 
bore  at  home.  Considering  the  qualities  of  each,  their  cleanli- 
ness, distances  from  a  foreign  market,  the  great  proportion  of  it 
in  Asia,  &c.  this  is  supposed  to  be  a  high  enough  value.  See 
prices  (note  2  above,  and  note  1)  in  India,  and  in  Liverpool,  of 
different  kinds  of  cotton.  Our  cotton  is  of  a  better  species,  and 
better  cleaned,  &c.  See  3  Crawford's  Hist,  of  Ind.  Arch.  350 
to  360.  Though  in  1791  its  quality  was  considered  so  inferior 
that  it  was  supposed  foreign  cotton  must  be  imported  to  supply 
factories.  Gales  &  Seaton's  Documents,  vol.  1,  Finance,  page 
142. 


^ 

36 

D. 

COTTON— RAW. 

Exportsfrom— [10]  [11] 

U.  states. 

Egypt 

and 

Turkey. 

Brazil. 

India. 

W.Indies 

Spanish 
America. 

Else- 
where. 

i 
•1 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

1770 

2,000 

[8] 

Millions. 

Millions. 

Millions. 

Millions. 

Millions. 

Millions. 

Millions. 

1789 

1790 

1  0 

1791 

JL 
S 

. 

20 

. 

12 

. 

5 

1792 

7 

1793 

JL 
2. 

1794 

If 

- 

- 

- 

_ 

1 

1795 

6\ 

- 

- 

20 

1796 

6h 

1797 

Si 

1798 

9i 

1799 

9^ 

1800 

nt 

1801 

20fo 
27i 

- 

24 

30 

17 

• 

7 

1802 

[2]- 

- 

- 

22i 

1803 

41A 

1804 

38,^- 

1805 

40i 

- 

- 

4U 

1806 

37^ 

1807 

66i 

1808 

12 

1809 

53i 

1810 

93-^ 

1811 

62i 

- 

31 

- 

7 

13 

1812 

29 

1813 

19f 

1814 

17f 

- 

37 


D.— COTTON— RAW— Continued. 


Exports  from — 


U.  states. 

Egypt 

Brazil. 

India. 

West 

Spanish 

Else- 

and 

Indies. 

America. 

where 

Turkey. 

£ 

jS 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

Millions. 

Millions. 

Millions. 

Millions. 

Millions. 

Millions. 

Millions. 

1815 

83 

1816 

81i 

1817 

851 

1818 

92^ 

1819 

88 

1820 

127t 

1821 

124/o 

bi 

28 

50 

9 

- 

6 

1822 

144fo- 

4i 

1823 

173fo 

11 

1824 

142f 

14 

1825 

176i 

- 

. 

75 

1826 

204i 

1827 

294 

1828 

210 

1829 

264t 

1830 

298i 

19 

39 

[5]68 

10 

- 

4 

1831 

277 

20i 

37 

70 

12 

_ 

4 

1832 

322i 

1833 

324^ 

1834 

384f 

23 

30 

80 

8 

7 

3 

1835 

386^ 

[1] 

[2] 

[3] 

[4] 

[6] 

[7] 

[8] 

[9] 

{!.]  The  exports  of  cotton,  or  in  other  words,  the  foreign  trade 
in  raw  cotton,  in  the  whole  world,  is  small  compared  with  the 
whole  growth,  manufacture,  and  consumption  of  that  article.  It 
probably  does  not  exceed  535  millions  of  pounds,  and  of  that 
the  United  States  export  about  384  millions  of  pounds,  or  almost 
three-fourths,  f  Our  exports  each  year  have  not  always  corre- 


38 

spondee!  with  that  part  of  the  crop  of  the  previous  year  not  con- 
sumed at  home,  as  in  1808,  1812,  &c.  commercial  restrictions 
and  war  caused  the  stocks  on  hand  to  accumulate,  and  the  high 
prices  in  some  other  years  have  left  much  less  on  hand  here  than 
usual. 

[2.]  Before  1802,  the  exports  of  cotton  did  not  appear  on  the 
custom-house  books  so  as  to  show  what  was  of  foreign  and  what 
of  domestic  growth ;  and  hence,  before  that  year,  and  occasion- 
ally since,  to  1825,  one  or  two  millions  a  year  of  our  exports 
may  have  been  the  growth  of  India  or  the  West  Indies.  Sey- 
bert's  Statistics,  pages  152  and  257  ;  and  see  table  B,  note  [4.] 
See  when  first  begun,  table  F,  note  [9.]  See  amounts  for  some 
years,  Seybert,  152  and  4. 

[3.]  From  1821  to  1824,  inclusive,  from  Egypt.  See  Urqu- 
hart  on  Turkey,  page  179.  The  amount  is  too  high,  if  the  bag 
or  bale  was  computed  as  it  is  now,  at  218  pounds  instead  of  98, 
as  formerly.  No  exports  were  from  Egypt  before  1820;  but 
previously  the  supplies  in  England  were  in  a  considerable  ratio 
from  Smyrna  and  other  parts  of  Turkey.  See  table  F  and  Lon- 
don Encyclopedia,  article  "  Cotton,"  and  Edinburgh  Encyclope- 
dia, "  Cotton."  See  table  A,  note  [6.]  Her  exports  for  1835, 
as  well  afs  1834,  are  said  to  be  diminishing. 

[4.]  A  great  part  of  this  is  from  the  northern  provinces  of  Bra- 
zil, and  includes  most  of  her  crop.  See  Walsh's  travels  in  Bra- 
zil. From  one-half  million  to  one  million  is  exported  from  Rio 
and  Bahia.  From  1809  to  1813  from  50,000  to  75,000  bags, 
averaging  180  pounds  each,  were  exported  from  Maranham  alone, 
and  about  two-thirds  to  three-fourths  of  it  to  England.  ( 1  Ros- 
ter's Travels,  page  227.)  From  Pernambuca,  the  exports  of 
raw  cotton  were,  from  1808  to  1813,  on  the  increase,  from  26,- 
877  bags  to  65,327.  See  Roster's  Travels,  page  146 — note.  See 
Smithers'  Tables  in  History  of  Liv.  The  exports  from  Brazil 
were  often  formerly  described  to  be  from  Portugal,  as  she  was  a 
dependency,  and  as  most  of  it  was,  under  her  colonial  system, 
shipped  first  to  Portugal,  and  then  re-exported.  Little  or  none 
was  raised  in  the  mother  country.  London  Encyclopedia,  article 
"  Cotton."  Coffee  and  sugar  are  taking  the  place  of  cotton  in 
her  exports. 

[5.]  The  exports  for  1830,  from  all  places  except  the  United 
States,  are  given  partly  from  data  in  Pitkin's  Stat.  484,  which 


39 

show  that  from  India  to  all  Europe  in  that  year  they  were  about 
25  millions  of  pounds;  from  Egypt  and  the  Levant,  about  18i 
millions  of  pounds  ;  and  from  Brazil  and  West  Indies,  about  49| 
millions  of  pounds.  Due  additions  have  been  made  to  these  for 
exports  elsewhere  than  to  Europe. 

[6.]  Of  this,  from  India,  60  millions  of  pounds  were  shipped 
from  Bombay,  and  most  of  the  rest  from  Calcutta.  Evid.  on 
East  India  Company,  pages  13  and  287,  appendix,  1832,  A.  D. 
See  1  Milbourn's  Orient.  Com.  It  is  supposed  that  the  exports 
of  cotton  from. India  will  increase  rapidly,  as  her  trade  is  more 
free  since  1833,  though  less  restricted  than  formerly,  since  1823. 
1  Smith's  Com.  Digest,  page  15. 

Most  of  the  raw  cotton  of  the  India  islands  has  been  consumed 
where  raised.  McCulloch,  page  437.  The  quantities  for  all 
the  years  except  1805  and  1825,  are  estimates  made  by  knowing 
the  amount  of  exports  to  England  and  the  United  States,  with 
those  in  some  of  the  years  to  China. 

In  London  Encyclopedia,  article  "  Cotton,"  the  exports  from 
India  to  China  alone,  in  1818,  are  stated  at  230  millions  of 
pounds,  which  must  be  an  error,  or  all  the  other  computations, 
as  to  both  crops  and  exports,  are  much  too  low  in  regard  to  India. 

[7.]  The  exports  from  the  West  Indies  sometimes  exceed  their 
whole  crop,  as  it  is  imported  from  the  Spanish  Main,  and  re-ex- 
ported. See  table  A,  note  [5.]  Colquhoun,  page  378,  says 
sometimes  double.  In  1793  they  exported  to  England  consid- 
erable cotton  grown  in  the  United  States.  Smithers,  page  156. 
See  more  on  their  exports,  table  A,  note  [5.] 

[8.]  The  exports  of  cotton  from  Spanish  America  in  1802, 
were  chiefly  from  Vera  Cruz,  collected  there  from  other  places. 
1  Dict'y  of  Span.  Com.  and  Finance,  pages  63  to  69.  From 
1804  to  1810  about  5i  millions  were  shipped  from  Venezuela, 
yearly,  (Mollier's  Travels  in  Colombia,  455 — note,)  and  half  a 
million  from  New  Granada.  Ditto,  456 — note.  From  Laguyra, 
in  1823,  about  one-fourth  of  a  million  exported.  Hall's  Colom- 
bia, page  152.  In  1822,  about  one-half  of  a  million  exported 
from  Caraccas,  and  li  million  of  pounds  from  all  the  Spanish 
provinces.     2  Hist,  of  Colombia,  1822. 

The  exports  for  1834  are  an  estimate  of  my  own. 

Those  for  1794  are  from  4  Humboldt's  Personal  Narrative, 
page  125 — note  ;  of  which  very  nearly  half  was  from  Laguyra, 
(3  do.  192,  6  do.  202j)  and  2^  millions  of  pounds  before  the 


40 

revolution,  exported  from  Varagua,  Maracaibo,  and  the  Gulf  of 
Cariaco. 

See  table  F,  note  9,  as  to  the  exports  from  English  territories 
in  America  before  the  revolution,  and  which  were  probably 
grown  in  the  West  Indies  or  Spanish  America. 

[9.  J  Among  the  places  not  enumerated,  which  have  exported 
some  cotton,  it  is  said  in  Montgomery's  Hist,  of  Brit.  Col.  page 
604,  that  14,900  pounds  of  raw  cotton  were  exported  from  the 
river  Gambia,  in  1833. 

In  1775  there  was  exported  to  Holland  alone,  from  Surinam, 
one-eighth  of  a  million  of  pounds.  2  Dict'y  of  Spanish  Com. 
Smithers'  Hist,  of  Liv. 

The  countries  more  particularly  included  under  "  Elsewhere," 
though  not  all,  and  about  which  much  is  known  of  their  exports 
in  cotton,  are  Demarara  and  Berbice.  See  imports  into  Eng- 
land, table  G.  The  data  as  to  exports  from  Brazil,  West  Indies, 
and  "  Elsewhere,"  in  last  column,  are  chiefly  the  ascertained 
imports  from  those  enumerated  places  into  other  countries. 
From  Naples  and  Spain  some  cotton  was,  in  1817,  exported  to 
France.  2  Chaptal,  page  6.  But  probably  most  of  the  growth 
of  other  places.     See  table  A,  note  [9.] 

[10.]  The  cost  of  exportation  or  freight  from  the  United 
States  to  Europe,  is  usually  less  than  two  cents  per  pound. 
Smithers,  page  139.  Even  this  has  been  reduced  by  the  im- 
provements which  mark  the  spirit  of  the  age,  as  the  cotton  is  so 
pressed  in  the  bales  that  it  occupies  less  space  in  a  vesssel,  and 
the  vessels  in  this  trade  are  so  constructed  as  to  carry  more 
when  of  the  same  tonnage. 

[11.]  A  small  duty  is  imposed  on  it  in  England  and  France. 
Baines's  His.  317  and  515.  Yet,  in  1769,  it  was  made  free  to 
aid  the  manufacturer.  3  McPhers.  Com.  447.  But  the  duty 
on  raw  cotton  is  remitted  or  allowed  in  drawback,  on  exporta- 
tion of  the  manufactured  article  in  England,  Pebrer  says  in  his 
tables,  in  his  work  on  England,  though  not  if  the  raw  article  is 
re-exported.  3  McPherson  on  Com.  page  659.  The  duty  was 
6  per  cent,  ad  valorem  in  England,  for  some  years  before  1831, 
on  foreign  cotton,  then  raised  to  5s.  \0d.  per  cwt.  (1  Com.  Dig. 
page  16,  by  Smith,)  and  .|n  1833  reduced  to  25.  l\d.  per  cwt. 
On  cotton  from  a  British  possession,  the  duty  is  only  4d.  per  cwt. 
See  McCulloch,  page  440.  But  formerly,  as  in  1799,  it  was 
from  8*.  9c?.  per  100  pounds,  to  12s.  6d.  from  different  places ; 


41 

and  from  1803  to  1815,  iiom  16s.  \0d.  to  335.  10c?.  See  a  table 
in  Edinb.  Encyclop.  article  "  Cotton." 

The  duty  in  the  United  States  on  foreign  cotton  imported  here 
is,  and  always  has  remained  since  1790,  at  3  cents  per  pound. 
Thougli  Mr.  Hamilton  recommended  its  reduction  in  1791,  to 
aid  our  manufactures.     See  Rep.  Dec.  30,  1791. 

The  duty  in  France  varies,  under  various  circumstances,  from 
10  to  16  per  cent.  See  McCulloch,  page  639,  "  Havre,"  and  2 
Com.  Dig.  73,  by  Smith. 

There  is  said  to  be  no  duty  on  raw  cotton  in  Switzerland, 
In  England,  in  1833,  it  is  stated  to  be  3  farthings  per  pound,  or 
10  per  cent.     West.  Rev.  for  April,  '33. 


42 

E. 
COTTON— RAW. 


Exports 

5  of  Cotton  fron 

1— 

ei   A 

a; 

a3 

OS 

. 

C-2 

■B  « 

3 

1 

f 
6 

e 

1 

< 

O 

M 

V 

'if 

^1 

■si 
1^ 

> 

i 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

Dollars. 

> 

Mill's. 

Millions. 

Millions. 

Millions. 

Millions. 

Millions. 

MilPns. 

1789 

1790 

3 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

48,285 

1791 

— 

— 

— 

- 

— 

- 

- 

52,000 

1792 

— 

- 

— 

- 

- 

- 

- 

51,470 

1793 

— 

- 

— 

— 

— 

- 

— 

160,000 
Millions. 

1794 

— 

— 

— 

— 

— 

— 

— 

1 

1795 

— 

— 

— 

- 

— 

- 

— 

2t 

1796 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_- 

2A- 

1797 

— 

— 

_ 

— 

— 

_ 

_ 

u 

1798 

— 

— 

_ 

— 

— 

— 

— 

3i 

1799 

— 

— 

_ 

— 

— 

— 

— 

4A 

1800 

_ 

10 

_ 

3 

_ 

5 

_ 

6 

1801 

— 

- 

— 

— 

— 

- 

— 

9 1  o" 

1802 

_ 

— 

_ 

— 

_ 

_ 

_ 

5i 

1803 

— 

— 

_ 

— 

— 

— 

_ 

7f 

1804 

— 

— 

_ 

— 

_ 

_ 

_ 

7f 

1805 

— 

— 

— 

— 

— 

— 

— 

9i 

1806 

— 

— 

— 

— 

— 

— 

— 

8t 

1807 

— 

— 

_ 

_ 

__ 

__ 

_ 

14i 

1808 

— 

— 

__ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

2i 

1809 

_- 

— 

— 

— 

_ 

_ 

_ 

Si 

1810 

5 

40 

-_ 

20 

10 

15 

4 

151 

1811 

- 

— 

— 

— 

_- 

— 

9J 

1812 

— 

_ 

^% 

_ 

^ 



_ 

3 

1813 

— 

_ 

— 

_ 

-^ 

_ 

__ 

2i 

1814 

— 

~ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

2i 

1815 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

ni 

43 


E.— COTTON— RAW— Continued. 


Exports  of  Cotton  from — 


c 

J 
S 

1 

(4 

o 

4) 

a3 

>• 

1 

o 

«3 

< 

o 

^ 

^ 

1^ 

w 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

Dollars. 

>> 

Millions. 

Millions. 

Millions. 

Mill's. 

Millions. 

Millions. 

Mill'ns. 

1816 

— 

— 

_ 

— 

_ 

_ 

_ 

241 

1817 

-- 

— 

— 

_ 

_ 

__ 

_ 

22i 

1818 

— 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

31i 

1819 

■  — 

— 

— 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

21 

1820 

30 

37 

8 

25 

28 

6 

3 

22i 

1821 

— 

— 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

20i 

1822 

— 

— 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

24 

1823 

_ 

_ 

— 

_ 

— 

_ 

_. 

23i 

1824 

— 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

2H 

1825 

— 

— 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

38f 

1826 

_ 

_ 

— 

_ 

_ 

_ 

— 

25 

1827 

_ 

— 

— 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

29i 

1828 

— 

_ 

— 

_ 

_ 

__ 

_ 

22i 

1829 

— 

— 

— 

_ 

_ 

__ 

_ 

26i 

1830 

120^ 

55i 

24 

49 

37ft 

nt 

2 

29f 

1831 

— 

— 

- 

_ 

— 

25i 

1832 

— 

— 

— 

— 

_ 

— 

— 

311 

1833 

— 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

36 

1834 

164 

67t 

5U 

56i 

30f 

in 

3 

AH 

1835 

— 

-. 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

6H 

ni 

[2] 

[3] 

[1 .]  The  exports  from  each  State  are  the  foreign  ones,  and  for 
1830  and  1834,  from  official  data;  but  prior  to  that  they  are  es- 
timates from  the  crop,  consumption  at  home,  &c. 

See  table  F,  note  [9] ,  as  to  some  exports  before  the  Revolution. 

The  first  cotton  supposed  to  be  of -American  growth,  ^brought 
to  New  York  city,  for  foreign  export,  it  is  said,  came  from  Sa- 
vannah in  1792,  and  consisted  of  only  two  bags.     The  amount 


44 

of  exports  coastwise  has  not  been  ascertained,  for  reasons  stated 
in  the  report.  Those  for  foreign  countries  from  any  particular 
State  often  include  more  than  the  crop  of  that  State,  as  from  New 
York,  which  raises  no  cotton,  and  from  Louisiana  which  raises  b\it 
a  small  part  of  her  exports.     See  table  B,  note  1. 

[2.]  The  portion  exported  of  Sea-island  cotton,  was,  in  1834, 
8,085,935  pounds,  and  in  1835,  was  7,752,736  ;  and  was  chiefly 
from  South  Carolina  and  Georgia.     See  official  returns. 

Its  cultivation  was,  as  remarked  in  a  former  table,  introduced 
into  South  Carolina  as  early  as  1787,  from  Bahama,  and  the  ex- 
port of  it  during  the  last  20  years  has  been  on  an  average  not 
far  from  8  millions  of  pounds.  It  may  be  cultivated  more  ex- 
tensively, it  is  supposed,  in  Florida.  See  prices  in  table  C  and 
notes,  and  B,  and  note  3. 

It  is  now  exported  chiefly  to  England,  say  seven-ninths,  over 
one-ninth  to  France,  and  the  rest  elsewhere.  See  McCuUoch, 
page  440.  It  has  taken  the  place  of  the  fine  cottons  formerly 
from  the  i^e  of  Bourbon. 

See  a  table  of  exports  of  it  from  1802  to  181 6,  inclusive,  going 
in  some  years  to  nearly  10  millions  of  pounds,  and  to  others  short 
of  one  milllion  ;  but,  as  before  named,  being  generally  about  8 
millions  of  pounds.     Seyb.  Stat,  page  152  and  4. 

[3.]  The  value  has  been  computed  from  the  quantity  and  av- 
erage price  through  each  year,  so  far  as  obtainable  from  official 
data. 

In  Seyb.  Stat,  page  147,  is  a  table  of  the  values  from  1803  to 
1817,  inclusive. 


45 


< 

.     I 

o 

H 

O 
O 


V 

en 
'wQ 

1 

•put;[5ua  o; 
X^^i-mx  puB  id.(Sa 

1 

Mill's. 

■       - 

•aouBjj  0)  saipui 

•puBiSua 
oj  saipui  ^s9AV 

J^      6 

•puB[Sua  o;  iizB.ia 

i 

1  i-'i 

5: 

0 

0 

•Bun|3  0)  tJipui 

tn 

-Q 

1  %      1   1   1   1   1   1   1   1   1 

0 

•puBiSua  Ai  «!pui 

;2 

CO 

a 
1  .2        111  ^i«-<i««Ki-i« 

J— J                                                        ^  ©CJ  t^ 

,05 

1  ^       1    1    1    1    1    1    1    1    1 

1 

•aouBjj  o^sams  "A 

ST  1  s      1    1    1    1    1    1    1    1    1 

^    1 

•puq 
-Sua  o)  sajr^s  "H 

£ 

0       £  ^   .  1=    i«>   |w   lo^hc^Hj'— i«-l» 

•SJ 

caA 

46 


pi 


•puBiSua  oj  iizejg 


o 
a. 

H 


•pu«{Sua 


Xa>[at\L  puB  ;dX5a 


•puB[Su3  oj 
Xa2l.ii5X  puB  ;cIXSa 


•30U«J J  O)  SSipUI 


•pu^iSua 
oj  sdipiii  ;saA\ 


•Buit|3  o\  Bipui 


•puBiSug  oj  Bipuj 


•aouB.ia  ^  ui^jug 
IBaao  UB^  saoBid 


'33UBJJ 


•puBiSua 


•sa«3A 


pc5 


■^  '-l«>-l'f-|«-lni»«l«»-^*  Nl^-^'-t-'l"''!"* 


(-    H 


:i.   I    I    I    I    I    i    I    I    I    I    I 


.2    '-IM'^K*  •9|^^|Mr-lKN|rt-<|M".!ff»t-Ie»     I 


.2   I    I    t    I    i    t    i    I    t    t    I 


V3 

.2    1        G^'^«0'«ti><o©:»l     I 


03 


oooooooooo::; 

GOQOQOQOQOQOQOaOQOQOQO 


47 


©^  (N  ©.>  l>^ 

He*  «i*  "i- r^i*  ^*  f-j*  cc!^ 

'     ' 

i    1    1    1 

1  1  1  1  Hc«H^  1 
CO  t-  QO 

r^ 

-Hcol^ 

f-M 

1    1 

1    1    1    1 

1  1  1  1  r,|Me<.lM  1 
t^  GO  SO 

^ 

1 

1«    |«?-  "^1"    |«''|w'^jM    K    )>«    H       H^        ^l-t       «K  -M-lw-K^  '•ht^ 

<X>i-OJ>COGO^J>COTt<GO©^<M©^Tjiio£2j 


0505Tt<GO^GOC500505COi-tOQOaOiOrr' 
©}^<M©)©^GO         eQ©^©iGOGOS^©:)»-»<M^ 


I       I       I       I       I       I       I    VC    c3      I    (o^QO      I    O    3  IT 
©^    5h       CD  ir:)         'rt    ^7^. 

■s — •  >_• 


i    I    I    i    I    I    I    I    i    I 


1,1,11  ,  ,  ^|„  .Hc^H't  _  H^  -l«  -1^  ^|c»^ 
CO  G0C5Tjii0C0O^O©*O©^C0^G<i©^S<»ri. 
GO  S^  I— II— i©^G<l©'»GO«<»'-*©^GOGOGOTt<   


I       I       I       I      I       I       I       I       I       |C50000i-«eQCD^OG0G0O5COO5OCOC:r' 


••|-«w,tj.  ^[co-|(m        -|«        '-1«f-Io»H«'*I<>»        iO  C*  CO  ^  O  

I      IO»-<OQ0     I      I      I      |«>^i0OO©^OG0r-w0t,fc,t-t^O5r7 
»-i         O--).-.  G<)0>)©.l'<tGOCOi>iOCOi>oO  i-i  r', 

CO  GO 


COCO     I       |iOi>^COi-'OGOT-HG<l©QO'-^i>'—  i>»-H»OJ>t^CO©'1 
TjievJ  rjiiO»iO»00050>0'^CirJiGOi-«»OxOi-iO'^©^CO»C 

^^        i-Ni-i©:»i-iT-i©;j©^©:i©^<M©^ 


»-N©^GO'^vOC01:-C0050'-«©^GO-^iiOCOi>a0050"©?COTt<iC 
1-^T—  r-»^i-iT-^»-Mi-HF-iS<)CM©^©<G^ev|eQeQ<3<l©QGOCOGOGOGOGO 
OOQOCOQOOOaOCOQOQOQOQOCOQOQOOOQOQOCOQOGOCOOOGOCOQO 

1-H 

48 

[1.]  The  exports  to  England  from  different  places  are  given 
chiefly  from  Marshall's  tables,  page  110;  London  Encyclop.  ar- 
ticle "  Cotton."  As  to  those  from  the  United  States,  since 
1820,  see  our  own  commercial  tablas.  A  slight  difference  some- 
times occurs  from  a  reference  by  some  to  the  exports  to  Liver- 
pool alone,  or  to  England  alone,  not  including  Scotland  or  Ire- 
land.    The  exports  from  the  United  States  to  them  all  were — 

Year.  Mill's  of  lbs.         Year.  Mill's  of  lbs. 


1831  -      -   -X.J 

1832  -     -   228 

1833  -     -   238i 


1834  -      -    284 

1835  -      -   269i 


See  Porter's  official  tables,  page  125.  Those  for  1817,  from 
India  to  England,  are  from  Rees's  Cyclop,  article  "  United 
States,"  in  a  note.  They  are  believed  to  be  too  high.  The 
quantities  are  given  in  pounds,  where  ascertainable  \vith  accu- 
racy, and  where  not  so,  the  proportions  are  stated  from  table  G, 
which  are  founded  on  the  imports  into  England  from  the  United 
States  and  other  countries.  (  See  Marshall,  page  110,  and  Smith- 
ers,  page  146.)  The  actual  quantities  exported  from  the  Uni- 
ted States  to  all  Great  Britain,  before  1800,  cannot  be  obtained 
"by  me  ;  but  the  number  of  bales  to  Liverpool  alone,  can  be,  and, 
as  a  matter  of  some  curiosity,  are  annexed:  1791,64;  1792, 
503;  1793,111;  1794,348;  1795,2,147;  1796,  4,668;  1797, 
5,193;  1798,  12,163;  1799,  13,236;  1800,  24,138.  See  more 
in  books  cited.  » 

[2.]  The  exports  from  the  United  States  to  England  and 
France  are  sometimes  taken  from  their  official  reports  of  imports, 
and  sometimes  from  ours  of  exports,  occasionally  differing  a  lit- 
tle by  losses  at  sea,  imperfect  returns,  and  in  the  former  not 
always  including  Scotland  and  Ireland.  The  proportions  are 
given  in  a  few  cases,  where  the  exact  quantity  was  uncertain, 
on  the  principle  in  table  G.  For  1813  and  '14,  see  that  table. 
But  the  quantities  given  for  1834  and  1835,  are  from  our  own 
returns.  In  respect  to  the  other  places  to  which  our  exports  go, 
a  statement  is  annexed,  giving  the  details  since  1820,  while  our 
returns  have  been  made  up  accurately  and  in  more  detail. 


49 


c 

•«J 

•^ 

CO 

<» 

^ 

. 

W 

^ 

•--» 

;^ 

a. 

•r^ 

V, 

3 

1 

§ 

o 

•e* 

#N 

r»i 

iC 

t^. 

CO 

QO 

so 

^ 

o 

e 

■«>» 

« 

^ 

«>■> 

•e  Qd 

^ 

y—f 

•«* 

S 

§ 

f^ 

^ 

0) 

►<i-o 

•*** 

g 

j2 

•tiia 

§ 

a. 

«i:,« 

"S 

^ 

'a 

Q 

s 

t 

§ 

§. 

•i» 

V 

8 

« 

•^ 

■S 

>i 

« 

°e>* 

5* 

ej 

1 

^ 

^s 


05   a 


•saor-id  d3\\\o  i\\' 


«M^K  r"^  ^V-^l 


1--  S^  SQ  05  r-<  CO  L-  X  O  t-  --N  O  i^  <M  O 

"s  co^cT 50^ t-^aTcTcrcQ^i-r go" Go'o"arco^G''5' 

=  OiCG0S<>O<M'<^t-C0G0Tt<iO^i0C5 
OiO-rJHOOe'"!»OCO^OS<JCO©^S^t-T--r'<!t 


-?!<  GO  GO 

(Q 

.  O  ^  CD 

CO 

-§  ^.^l^. 

1 

=  J-  CD  t- 

O  05  lO  ^ 

a,co  ci  ©>! 

O  OO  l^  iO  ^  ^ 
1--  CD  CO  CD  C5  ^- 
^^  O^  GO^  G^^  CD^  05^ 

'  co"l>"cD"io"vrf  o" 

^  O  ^  GO  O  GO 
1-1  Tt  O  S<J  GO  lO 


QO  a 


•suMoj  asuBH 


•aisaux 


•gaip 
•ui  is3A\.  Msiu^ds 


•ureclg 


^  »— I  iij 


T:t<©5050'rtiCOCDt-Oe50iCt^ 
COC5X001:^»-'OC5'<tCD<3Q<M05'>!^ 
VOlOCO'-<CD"Oi-«i>OJ>'—  CDCO'-* 


3  '■*-' 


iOCDS<llr-©QO:)CDl>GOCDiOOGClCD 

iOioa5i>F-icocoxo©^,-Mi>j>F-Hco 

Oi^GO^©^  iO  O^CO^GO^CO^f-^-rJ^^O^GO^CD^t^ 

(^r©r       ©f  Go"Go'cD'Tdr©rTt'i-^cD'"©f 


CD  CO  C5 
.  1>  GO  QO 

5  GO  «-<  »> 


'-HTJfTtt-t^QOiCOGQT-* 
i-'OiCTfl>iOi»O^CD 
GO^  ©i^  GO^  SQ^  '^  GO^  t^  ^^<yi^  G>^ 

go"  go"  o"  ^"^  "^  ccT  TjT  t-T  irT  gtT 

GocoaDr-»-i>i^OO  Tj* 

T-i  a>  o^cq^r^^cD^T-j^GO^oi^ 

rj^  ©'f  ©^  i-T  i-T  go"  TjT 


.  CO  TJ4  GO 

.§C5  CD  .    »0 

©©fiio"  so" 

1>  -^ 


11(111(111 


©^ 

-Sco^ 

o  GO 

^©1 


(    »    (    (    ( 


o 

05- 


(    ( 


O  QO  ^  CD  J>  05 
»--  C5  i>  »-N  CO  1-* 
©0  O^CO^©>7^C5^©3^ 

©f  ifT  co"  ccT  ©f  oT 

00  ^  CO  iO  C5  t* 
lO  ©^t*  QO  QO 

©cT 


•inniS 
•pa  pu«  P««HOH 


•BISStlH  oj. 


'ej«3A 


CDCOQOCO^CiOC01>G005CDGOeQaO 
.050rt<r-e^GOOCOC005UO'-'OCO^ 

s  ccTo^o'e^f  o"©^'"'^''o'i^'-^''©^'"o'"G<rc£rTir 

oC01>iOGO©}05COGOO:)COi>©}l^O><3a 
Ph  F—  Oi  CD  -rj^  '^  ^'-Ss*^"^^'^  "^^"^^-^ 


005GO»0'^*^S^'-''--'COCDO'-*iO'^'-« 

.COCOJ>r}<GOCDOC5aOi>GOi00050 

-rtCDt^COCD05©^»-^l:-COGOi>05'«*Tt<QO 

STHG0O»^G0ii0i>05t-T-ii-HC0t^OTf 

oOT-HOOco»-*'«t''<*©^»— coGOTj<coi* 

adGOi^GOVOT-*  T—iCD©!'— •t*G0"^©5O 


1— i©J00Ti<vC«Dt-Q0O5O'^©5e0'^ift 
©:t©J©5©.1©}©.105eQ©5GOCOOOGO«OGO 
COCOXCOCDGOGOdOCOQOQCQOQOCOQO 


50 

[3.]  The  exports  to  England  from  other  places  than  the  Uni- 
ted States  for  1834  and  '5  are  from  the  last  annual  report  in 
January,  1836,  at  Liverpool.  It  is  said  in  Smithers'  History  of 
Liverpool,  page  124,  that  the  first  imports  from  India  were  in 
1798,  and  proved  to  be  very  profitable;  but  they  began  five  or 
six  years  earlier  to  London,  if  not  to  Liverpool.  See  table  G, 
and  notes,  and  same  page  in  Smithers,  that  Surats  were  import- 
ed in  1783  :  in  page  125,  he  says  that  632  millions  of  pounds  in 
one  of  the  late  years,  being  then  1824,  were  shipped  from  Cal- 
cutta to  England,  but  the  official  tables  are  lower, 

[4.]  Of  the  exports  from  India  to  China  in  1828,  over  12i 
millions  of  pounds  were  from  Calcutta  alone.  Evidence  on 
East  India  Company,  page  13,  1832.  For  1834,  see  Baines's 
history,  page  32,  which  is  too  low.  For  other  years  except 
1831  and  1832,  see  1  Milbourne's  Oriental  Comm.  page  281. 
The  cotton  trade  to  China  began  in  the  last  half  century,  or 
about  1787,  and  the  reasons  for  it  are  stated  in  table  A,  note  9. 
The  exports  for  1831  and  1832,  are  from  McCulloch,  pages  237 
and  238.  China  has  raised  and  manufactured  cotton  since  the 
13th  century,  though  less  since  1787.  See  table  A,  note  9.  In 
London  Encyclop.  article  "  Cotton,"  it  is  said  that,  in  1818, 
about  230  millions  of  pounds  were  exported  from  India  to 
China  ;  but  it  is  probably  an  error.  In  supplement  to  Encyclop. 
Brit.  art.  "  Cotton,"  it  is  supposed  to  be  one-half  what  had  been 
yearly  consumed  in  England,  (1824,)  or  50  to  60  millions  of 
pounds,  which  is  higher  than  Milbourne,  but  it  agrees  substan- 
tially with  McCulloch,  whose  statement  is  from  official  returns ; 
it  is  the  greatest  article  of  trade  from  India  to  China,  except 
opium.  See  McCulloch,  page  236  ;  3  Crawford,  his.  of  Ind. 
Ar.  350. 

[5.]  The  exports  from  Brazil  to  England  began  in  1781. 
Smithers'  history  of  Liverpool,  124,  and  are  often  included  till 
1808,  under  the  head  of  Portugal.    Smithers,  146.    See  table  D. 

[6.]  The  exports  from  Egypt  alone  to  England,  it  is  said,  did 
not  commence  till  1823,  (Smithers'  history,  page  136,)  and  con- 
sisted of  2,108  bags,  or  short  of  one-quarter  of  a  million  of 
pounds,  as  their  bags  then  weighed.  See  London  Encyclop. 
article  "  Cotton,"  which  says  that,  before  1790,  nearly  6  or  7 
millions  of  pounds  yearly,  were  exported  to  England  from 
Smyrna. 


51 

[7.]  Under  West  Indies,  the  years  1834  and  1835  include 
Demarara,  and  elsewhere,  not  enumerated,  as  they  are  not  dis- 
criminated in  the  last  annual  report  at  Liverpool,  which  is  the 
authority. 

[8.]  The  exports  of  1787,  from  "all  other  places"  to  Eng- 
land, include  If  million  of  pounds  from  Demarara  and  Berbice. 

[9.]  The  exports  in  1770  were  from  the  then  provinces  of 
New  York,  3  bales  ;  from  Virginia,  four  bags ;  and  from  North 
Carolina,  3  barrels.  Smithers'  history,  page  153.  It  was  prob- 
ably all  of  foreign  growth,  i.  e.  of  the  Spanish  Main,  or  of  the 
West  Indies,  as  was,  it  is  presumed,  most  if  not  all,  of  the  eight 
bags  from  "America,"  seized  in  1784.  Sn\ithers'  history,  124 
and  156.  See  table  B.  note.  First  exports  of  our  own  cotton 
were  in  small  packages  from  the  United  States,  called  "  pockets." 
Smithers'  history,  135. 

It  would  seem  that,  late  as  1794,  Mr.  Jay,  when  making  the 
treaty  with  England,  was  not  aware  that  any  cotton  was  exported 
from  the  United  States.  In  Seyb.  Stat,  page  92,  it  is  said,  that 
the  first  export  of  cotton  of  our  own  growth  took  place  in  1791. 
See  table  B,  note  4. 


52 

G. 
COTTON— RAW. 


Imports  of 

Where  from. 

06 

i 
t 

o 

c 

1 

■1 

'S 

■p3 

0 

1. 

.5 

n3 

1^ 

1 

cu 
O 

>* 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

Millions. 

Millions. 

.Millions. 

Millions. 

Millions, 

Millions. 

Millions. 

1701 

HVo'-A 

1710 

7 
T?) 

1720 

2  ' 

1730 

^ 

! 

1741 

h% 

1751 

3 

. 

1764 

'^ro 

3766 

3 

1780 

5 

1784 

11 

1787 

22 

- 

21J 

If 

6S 

5? 

- 

6 

1789 

32J 

1790 

31J 

Ratio. 

Ratio. 

Ratio. 

Ratio 

Ratio. 

Ratio. 

Ratio. 

1791 

28J 

ToVo 

J 

4 

- 

- 

i 

1792 
1793 

35 

19 

^5 

— 

4 

_ 

1 

^5 

1 

1794 
1795 

24^ 
26^ 

t 

1 

~ 

J 
J 

~ 

ToU 

1796 

32 

A 

1 

\ 

1 

- 

A- 

sV 

1797 

2^ 

A 

1 

4 

- 

tV 

A 

1798 
1799 

31| 

•gr 

i 

4 
f 

— 

^i 

sy 

1800 

56' 

1 

1 

— 

1 

s 

1801 

56 

■i  ^ 

J 

T2 

6" 

- 

A 

1802 

60^ 

3 

7 

i 

1 

- 

To 

135 

1803 
1804 

53f 
61i 

* 
J 

t 
1- 

— 

s 

i 

1805 
1806 
1807 
1808 

59| 

58i 
75       1 
43J     1 

1 

1' 

! 

\ 

- 

i 

ajr 

53 


G.— COTTON— RAW— Continued. 


Imports  of 

Where  from. 

i 

i 

1 

in 

4> 

'5b 

03 

13 

5  s^ 

8 

>  B 

a  js 

C 

e«   ^ 

O. 

1 

O 

c 

1 

1 

1— < 
to 

1^ 

c 

o 

^ 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

Millions. 

-Ratio. 

Ratio. 

Ratio. 

Ratio. 

Ratio. 

Ratio. 

Ratio. 

1809 

928 

J 

^ 

iV 

- 

A 

aV 

1810 

132| 

§ 

J 

4 

A" 

- 

* 

1811 

91J 

1 

^ 

i 

yd" 

- 

- 

1812 

63 

i 

J 

I 

JL 

- 

- 

A 

1813 

51 

^ 

^6 

jy 

- 

- 

3j^ 

1814 

73§ 

1 

f 

$ 

j3j 

- 

- 

jV 

1815 

96| 

\y 

J 

A 

- 

- 

»^ 

1816 

97^ 

U 

J 

T4 

FJ 

- 

- 

A 

1817 

126i 

1 

4 

A 

— 

- 

t': 

1818 

174 

i 

T(J 

T2 

— 

- 

1819 

137J 

4 

^ 

A 

— 

- 

• 

1820 

U7i 

f 

I 

A 

tV 

5^0 

} 

1 

1821 
1822 

126J 
141J 

5 

J 

S 

¥ 

ITT 

1823 

183J 

i 

^ 

■h 

It 

1824 

1474 

} 

6" 

4 

tV 

1 

^ 

1825 

244J 

T 

■^ 

? 

tV 

1 

t 

1826 

170J 

1 

i 

0 

1 

\i 

1 

1827 

264J 

f 

1 

i 

B" 

T6 

T3 

^ 

1828 

222f 

_1 
4 

3 

YT 

tV 

1829 

218^ 

1 

If* 

J 

To 

i 

1830 

259| 

1  to  f 

+  «o'* 

^ 

CT 

A 

YS 

1831 

280 

f  lo  1 

* 

A 

TS 

1832 

270§ 

1 

tV 

- 

t'o 

1 

1833 

288 

1 

iV 

- 

1 

I- 

1834 

320^ 
[303] 

tft'i 

tV 

^ 

J 

lils 

* 

1835 

,    361^ 

[303i] 
[1]  [2J 

«s* 

1 

i 

[4] 

54 

[1.]  For  the  early  imports  of  cotton  into  England,  see  more 
in  Baines,  346 ;  McCuUoch,  438 ;  and  Seyb.  Stat.  92,  note.  In  1787 
the  imports  set  down  as  from  Turkey  and  Egypt,  were  entirely 
from  the  former,  Smyrna,  Greece,  &c.  and  none  from  the  last  until 
1820  and  1823,  and  since  that  mostly  from  Egypt.  The  "  other 
places"  were  chiefly  French  and  Spanish  colonies  in  1787 ;  but 
include  India  and  Turkey  where  those  columns  are  blank.  See 
a  table  in  Smithers'  History,  page  146.  The  early  imports  of 
raw  cotton,  after  the  manufacture  increased  much  in  England, 
were  from  the  West  Indies,  Surinam,  and  isle  of  Bourbon. 
Smithers'  History  of  Liverpool,  123.  Those  from  Brazil,  &c. 
in  1824.     See  Smithers,  page  454. 

[2.]  The  proportions  are  given  from  the  imports  into  Liver- 
pool alone  ;  but  will  not  vary  much  for  the  whole  kingdom. 
They  are  stated  in  the  present  form  to  aid  in  the  comparison,  at 
different  periods  in  the  same,  and  different  countries.  The 
fractions  are  very  near  the  true  proportion,  but  occasionally  are 
the  next  highest  or  lowest  to  the  exact  sum,  for  convenience  in 
calculation,  as  is  the  case  in  fractions  often  in  all  these  tables. 
See  Marshall,  page  110;  Smithers,  147. 

[3.]  The  whole  imports  into  England,  Scotland,  and  Ireland, 
are  included  in  the  above  column  ;  as  some  of  the  writers  dis- 
criminate between  those  into  England  alone,  and  some  do  not. 
See  Porter's  official  tables,  125  ;  McCulloch,  439.  See  a  table 
in  Smithers,  page  146  ;  making  the  imports  into  Ireland  one  to 
two  millions  of  pounds  yearly^  after  from  1791  to  1817.  In  Baines, 
the  quantities  often  differ  a  few  millions,  and  are  higher  in  most 
cases.  See  also  Edinburgh  Review,  page  19,  1827.  The 
usual  quantity  imported  into  Ireland  and  Scotland,  as  contradis- 
tinguished from  England,  has  been,  during  the  last  ten  years, 
about  10  to  15  millions  of  pounds  per  annum,  it  is  believed.  In 
1834,  it  was  about  20  millions  of  pounds  ;  in  1835,  it  was  about 
18  millions  of  pounds.  Most  of  that  used  in  Ireland  is  believed 
to  be  re-exported  from  England,  or  included  in  English  imports  ; 
and  no  separate  tables  have  been  kept  of  Irish  imports  since 
1825,  when  those  of  cotton  exceeded  6f  millions  of  pounds. 
Baines's  History,  page  430.  The  largest  amounts  for  1834 
and  1835  are  taken  from  the  Liverpool  reports  of  January,  1836  ; 
and  the  smaller  ones,  in  the  second  lines,  from  other  sources  of 
not  so  recent  date. 


55 

[4.]  Most  of  the  above  ratios  from  India,  between  1793  and 
1809,  correspond  with  1  Milbourne's  Orient.  Com.  page  281, 
and  may  differ  some  from  the  tables  as  to  Liverpool  imports 
alone. 

[5.]  The  imports  from  the  United  States  in  1792,  1793,  &e. 
were  said  to  be  chiefly  through  the  British  West  Indies.  Smith- 
ers,  157.  Our  ratio,  it  will  be  seen  by  the  sums  in  the  second 
line  for  1834  and  1835,  will  vary  as  the  English  accounts  differ 
concerning  the  whole  actual  or  estimated  amount  of  her  yearly 
imports. 


56 


H.— COTTON— RAW. 


Imports  of. 

Where  from. 

Im 

ports  0 

r. 

«'2 

>» 

3  S 

'6 

^ 

%   ' 

£1, 

c 

t 

CA 

^ 

xi  CO 

„  (U 

m 

4J 

01 

2 

*->    (U 

>^1« 

4) 

, 

■s  . 

O 

C 

2 
ft* 
o 

G 
•-< 

5 

en 

-0 

0) 

•£ 

Is 

T3  ^ 

1^ 

Into  Saxon 
sia,  Trie 
Russia. 

N 

en 
1 

en 

1 

.s 

'.2 

o 

4->    CO 

o 
5 

to 

tm 

1 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

Mill»s. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Mijl's. 

Mill's. 

1789 

1790 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

97,357 
Mill's. 

1791 

_ 

_ 

_ 

^ 

_ 

„ 

_ 

_ 

i 

1792 

_ 

- 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

. 

_ 

h 

179S 

- 

- 

_ 

- 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

2| 

1794 

- 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

2I 

1795 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

4 

1796 

_ 

- 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

4i 

1797 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

^ 

_ 

Si 

1798 

^ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

3| 

1799 

- 

« 

_ 

_ 

_ 

«. 

_ 

_ 

3i 

1800 

_ 

~ 

- 

_ 

_ 

„ 

_ 

4* 

1801 

- 

i 

- 

- 

- 

_ 

_ 

_ 

4i 

1802 

- 

2 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

3A 

1803 

_ 

4 

_ 

_ 

_ 

n 

•        _ 

3 

1804 

_ 

6 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

3i 

1805 

- 

^ 

- 

- 

- 

_  • 

_ 

_ 

2i 

1806 

21  7-10 

7 

- 

_ 

_ 

„ 

_ 

25 

2i 

1807 

_ 

6 

_ 

_ 

_ 

„ 

_ 

_ 

3| 
4i 

1808 

- 

2 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

1809 

- 

_ 

- 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

I 

1810 

>5 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

t 

1811 

^ 

_ 

„ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

^ 

_ 

1 

1812 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

1 

1813 

_ 

10* 

- 

_ 

_ 

_ 

^ 

_ 

ll 

1814 

_ 

11 

_ 

_ 

™. 

_ 

_ 

_ 

1815 

_ 

20 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

T 

1816 

_ 

18 

«. 

_ 

_ 

_ 

3 

1817 

- 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

1818 

- 

~ 

- 

- 

_ 

_ 

_ 

ll' 

1819 

_ 

- 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

1820 

44^ 

- 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

1 

1821 

47^ 

27i 

- 

_ 

_ 

6 

_ 

_ 

1 

* 

1822 

61 

2H 

_ 

« 

_ 

„ 

_ 

_ 

1823 

51 

25 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

57 


H.— COTTON— RAW— Continued, 


Imports  of. 

Where  from. 

Imports  < 

3f. 

i 

^^ 

Oh     . 

c 

et 

01 

».• 

♦-    0) 

_    OJ 

^ 

i 
I 

1 

^1 

Saxony, 
,  Trieste 

issia. 

0) 
N 

I 

i 

Is 

ll 

2 

^ 

2^ 

5-i« 

2 

o 

o 

o 

c 

t3 

U 

ffl 

C 

NX 

C 

c 

c 

i 
1 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

1824 

75i 

40^ 

- 

- 

~ 

- 

_ 

_ 

^ 

1825 

6U 

30 

_ 

. 

"• 

- 

_ 

^ 

1 

1826 

96 

62i 

_ 

» 

_ 

« 

30? 

i 

1827 

sr 

70h 

_ 

. 

_ 

- 

_ 

- 

j 

1828 

61^ 

53i 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

- 

1829 

72i 

67^ 

_ 

- 

- 

- 

- 

1830 

84|  to  91 

75 

6 

7 

38 

17i^ 

- 

_ 

X 

1831 

65^  to  61 

46  to  50 

7i 

H 

39 

18  4-5 

- 

38  to  68 

i 

1832 

77    to  85 

73  to  77^ 

8i 

2i 

48 

m 

- 

60 

i 

1833 

91 

761 

36 

19 

_ 

- 

ji 

1834 

83  to  94^ 

78  to  81| 

7 

4 

- 

19i 

2 

45     ? 

i 

1835 

94i 

91 

_ 

— 

— 

_ 

- 

— 

ll 

[1] 

[2] 

[3] 

[4] 

[5] 

[6] 

[7] 

[8]  [9] 

[  1 .]  The  value  of  the  imports  of  raw  cotton  into  each  country, 
it  has  not  been  deemed  necessary  to  give  in  detail,  as  the  quan- 
tity, and  the  prices  in  the  United  States  and  Liverpool,  with 
those  in  India,  and  some  other  places  occasionally,  are  presented, 
and  will  enable  any  person  easily  to  make  a  computation  of  the 
whole  value  of  the  imports  into  any  particular  country. 

[2.]  The  imports  into  any  country  during  any  particular  year, 
sometimes  fall  short  of  the  actual  consumption  in  that  year,  if  a 
large  stock,  from  any  particular  cause,  be  on  hand  at  the  begin- 
ning, or  a  very  small  stock  at  the  end  of  the  year.  The  whole 
amount  imported  into  any  place,  and  the  amount  from  each  coun- 
try, differ  a  little  occasionally,  by  mistakes  in  copying,  or  mis- 
prints probably.  For  imports  of  1820  and  1821,  into  France, 
see  Quarterly  Review,  (1824-5.)  For  those  of  1834,  see  ta- 
bles of  French  Com,  for  '34  ;  and  for  1810,  Edinburgh  Review 
8 


58 

page  61 ,  ( 1829,)  which  states  those  for  1828-9,  at  80  or  90  mil^ 
lions  of  pounds;  for  1806,  see  London  Encyclop.  article  "  Cot- 
ton." Baines,  515.  From  1822  to  1832,  see  a  table  in  McCul- 
loch's  Diet.,  page  448,  which  is  given  below  in  bags.  In  1819, 
in  vol.  3,  Diet,  of  Com.  and  Finance  for  Spain,  page  244,  the 
value  of  imports  of  raw  cotton  is  estimated  at  only  $2,000,000, 
into  France,  but  it  must  be  too  low.  Those  for  1833,  and  the 
smallest  for  1834  and  for  1835,  are  from  manuscript.  Annexed 
are  the  quantities  in  bales,  and  the  stocks  on  hand  each  year, 
from  1822  to  1835,  inclusive,  from  another  and  similar  source, 
as  to  the  three  last  years  ;  the  previous  ones  are  from  McCulloch. 
See  table  T,  note  [2,]  as  to  stocks  on  hand  in  England. 

Statement  of  the  general  imports  and  stocks  of  cotton  in  France, 
in  1835,  compared  tvith  those  of  the  thirteen  preceding  years. 


Years. 

Imports. 

stocks,  Dec.  I 

1822 

baks 

205,861 

45,545 

1823 

(( 

169,845 

40,078 

1824 

u 

251,074 

47,194 

1825 

u 

204,572 

35,306 

1826 

li 

320,174 

74,479 

1827 

u 

290,617 

85,403 

1828 

a 

206,132 

51,812 

1829 

u 

242,230 

29,292 

1830 

u 

282,752 

61,260 

1831 

a 

218,393 

35,810 

1832 

u 

259,159 

22,506 

1833 

a 

305,633 

61,753 

1834 

u 

274,307 

24,407 

1835 

<t 

324,425 

40,096 

[3.]   See  Pitkin's  Stat.,  page  485. 

[4.]  Those  for  Saxony,  Prussia,  and  Trieste,  are  given  from 
Pitkin's  Statistics,  485.  About  one-third  comes  from  the  United 
States,  and  some  of  it  through  France  and  Holland  ;  from  Brazil 
and  the  West  Indies  one-fourth ;  from  Egypt  and  Turkey  one- 
fifth  ;  and  from  India  one-fourth.  See  note  8  below,  and  McCul- 
loch's  Diet.,  442.  In  Saxony  and  Prussia,  the  manufacture  of 
cotton  cloth  is  considerable,  but  is  chiefly  from  English  yarn. 
See  exports  of  manufactures  from  England,  and  supplement  to 
Encyclop.  Britannica,  article  "  Cotton."     The  spinning  is  slowly 


59 

increasing  by  machinery.  In  1831,  Prussia  exported  one-fourth 
more  of  cotton  cloths  than  in  1826,  being  17  millions  of  yards. 
Blackwood's  Magazine  for  January,  1836. 

[5.]  Of  the  imports  into  Switzerland,  quite  six  millions  pass 
in  some  years  through  France.  Genoa  imported  in  1830,  two 
and  one-half  million  ;  in  1831,  four  and  one-tenth  millions  ;  1832, 
live  and  one-tenthc  Half  of  this  probably  goes  to  Switzerland, 
and  nearly  half  the  imports  into  Trieste.  (See  below.)  Swit- 
zerland has  long  imported  cotton,  but  it  has  chiefly  been  spun  by 
the  distaff.  Supplement  to  Encyclop.  Britannica,  *^  Cotton."  See 
more  Westminister  Review,  for  April,  1833. 

[6.]  Those  into  Spain  were  chiefly  from  provinces  in  America. 
1  Diet,  of  Fin.  and  Com. 

[7.]  Except  the  large  sum  for  1831,  and  that  for  1832,  which 
are  founded  on  a  table  in  McCulloch,  the  imports  into  China  are 
computed  from  other  writers  on  the  exports  thither  from  India, 
with  a  small  addition  from  other  places,  chiefly  inlands.  See 
tables  D  and  F,  and  3  Crawford's  History.  Most  of  the  exports 
from  India  go  to  China,  except  what  went  to  the  United  States 
formerly,  and  then  and  now  to  England.  Table  G.  It  is  feared 
that  they  are  not  usually  stated  high  enough.  Supplement  to 
Encyclop.  Brit.  "  cotton." 

[8.]  The  imports  into  the  United  States  are  taken  from  ofl&- 
cial  returns,  and  have  been  very  fluctuating  in  amount ;  they 
have  come  chiefly  from  India.  See  Seybert,  92,  where  he  says, 
that  before  1825  we  consumed  two  millions  of  pounds  of  it  year- 
ly. For  a  table  of  imports  and  exports  of  foreign  raw  cotton, 
from  1800  to  1814,  see  Seyb.  Stat,  page  257. 

[9.]  Other  countries  of  Europe  than  those  enumerated,  import 
considerable  quantities  of  raw  cotton  :  e.  g.  Holland  and  Bel- 
gium, about  10  or  12  millions  of  pounds,  of  which  a  part  passes 
into  Germany,  and  five  or  six  millions  of  pounds  are  from  the 
United  States.  So  into  Germany  direct  are  imported  at  Trieste 
alone,  from  the  United  States  about  four  to  five  millions,  and 
some  from  Egypt  and  Turkey ;  in  all,  making  in  1830,  12t  mil- 
lion of  pounds;  1831,  19t  million  of  pounds  ;  and  in  1832,  25f 
million  of  pounds,,  McCulloch,  page  442.  Into  the  Hanse  towns 
are  imported  from  here  two  to  six  niillionscf  pounds  more  yearly, 


60 

and  about  one  million  of  pounds  to  Russia,  &c.  See  exports, 
table  F,  note  2.  Russia  imported  into  Petersburg,  in  all  1830, 
2i  million  of  pounds;  1831,  seven-tenths  million  of  pounds; 
1822,  one  and  eight-tenths  million  of  pounds.  In  1834,  Belgium 
is  said,  by  Mr.  Alexander,  to  have  imported  12f  million  of 
pounds  of  raw  cotton.  It  is  said  in  Westminster  Review,  for 
April,  1833,  that  Lombardy  alone  consumes  four  million  pounds 
of  raw  cotton  yearly » 


62 


I 


COTTON— RAW. 


Quantity  consumed  and  manufactured  in- 


i 

c 

4> 
U 

c 

en 

ii 
S 

i  . 

;5 

America  and 
exico  includ- 
ng:  Brazil. 

I 

1 

2 

2i 

i 

V 

U^ 

i.J 

o 

oi^-" 

O 

cc 

&i 

H 

s 

" 

<« 

^ 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

MillV 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

irso 

13 i  in  the  three  countries. 

1784 

lU 

1789 

1790 

•30i 

- 

5 

1791 

28 

10 

H 

285 

50 

15 

52 

2 

2 

60 

1792 

33i 

1793 

171 

1794 

23 

1795 

25 

1796 

31 

1797 

22i 

1798 

31 

18 

1799 

42 

m 

1800 

51 

6* 

8  [A.] 

1801 

53^ 

11  i 

1510 

9 

280 

45 

22 

50 

3 

5 

50 

1802 

56i 

1803 

5H 

15# 

'  _ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

^ 

3 

1804 

663 

m 

1805 

58f 

18^ 

lU*] 

1806 

57i 

211 

1807 

7n 

1808 

41i 

1809 

87^ 

1810 

126 

25 

16  [3i] 

1811 

89^ 

23 

17 

270 

48 

25 

48 

5 

6 

50 

1812 

59^ 

21 

1813 

1814 

52^ 

1815 

92 

- 

3U 

1816 

86^ 

1817 

116^ 

o0oi-26 

1818 

172 

\ 

1819 

132| 

1820 

142 

44 

1821 

114 

47 

50 

260 

42 

50 

45 

R 

7 

45 

1822 

120^ 

61 

' 

1823 

177 

50i 

65 
I.— COTTONS-RAW— Continued. 


Quantity  consumed  and  manufactured  in — 


. 

Vnh 

c4 

c 
t— 1 

caai 
nclu 
zil. 

K 

9. 

ns 

CO 

c    . 

r—  ? 

>> 

XO 

Englan 

1 

no 

S.  Ame 

Mexico 

ing-Bi 

1 

1 

i 

i 

lbs. 
Mill's. 

lbs. 
Mill's. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

lbs. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Milt's. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

Mill's. 

1824 

131 

75 

_ 

_ 

- 

_ 

_ 

^ 

7  -,i- 

1825- 

206 

60 

»o 

1826 

150i 

96 

1827 

250^ 

87 

1828 

208i 

61 

60 

1829 

190| 

7U 

1830 

255 

874 

. 

1831 

257 

65^ 

77^ 

1832 

260 

78 

1833 

284i 

87 

80to85 

242 

35 

36 

42 

10 

20 

40 

1834 

297 

80 

1835 

320i 

- 

100 

[10] 

[9 

[12] 

[1] 

[2] 

[3] 

14] 

[11] 

[8] 

[S] 

[7] 

[6] 

[1.]  It  is  important  to  bear  in  mind  that  this  table  does  not 
showthe  consumption  of  manufactured  cotton,  but  only  the  con- 
sumption and  manufacture  of  cotton  in  its  raiv  state ;  hence  it 
includes  the  quantity  of  raw  cotton  raised  in  any  country  and  not 
exported,  with  the  additional  quantity  imported  and  not  re-ex- 
ported, allowing  the  quantities  on  hand  at  the  commencement 
and  termination  of  each  year  to  be  similar.  Most  of  the  quanti- 
ties include  what  is  used  in  all  ways,  and  made  in  families  as 
^ell  as  in  manufactories.  It  also  includes  what  is  consumed  in 
a  raw  state,  which  is  calculated  to  be,  in  England,  quite  r^th. 
The  whole  consumption  in  Europe,  in  1830,  was  about  387  mil- 
lions of  pounds,  (Pitk.  Stat.,  484;)  or  less  iLan  the  present  ex- 
ports of  the  United  States.  The  consumption  in  manufactures, 
of  raw  cotton  in  all  Europe,  in  1803,  was  estimated  at  only  60 
millions  of  pounds,  Dictionary  of  Spanish  Commerce ;  and  in 
London  Encyclopedia,  article  "  Cotton,"  computed  at  only  18 
millions  of  pounds  in  all  Europe,  except  England  and  France. 
Till  1773,  the  warp  in  the  web  of  what  was  called  cotton  cloth 


64 

in  Eng;land,  was  linen.     McCulloch,  438.     (See  table  A,  note 
9.)     See  below,  note  [12.] 

[2.]  The  above  quantities  for  England  are  generally  taken 
from  Marshall's  tables,  which  are  copied  and  approved  by  Pit- 
kin. But  Porter,  in  his  tables,  makes  the  quantity  from  1820  to 
1832,  larger  by  5  to  10  millions  of  pounds  per  annum.  Part  of 
the  difference  may  arise  from  including  Ireland,  and  part  by 
sometimes  looking  only  to  the  imports,  and  deducting  the  quan- 
tity re-exported ;  when,  in  fact,  the  quantity  on  hand  at  the  be- 
ginning and  end  of  the  year,  or  the  actual  quantity  entered  for 
home  consumption,  was  essentially  different.  About  10  to  20 
millions  of  pounds  yearly,  or  often  as  little  as  A  to  /bth  of  what 
is  imported  is  re-exported  from  England.  See  Baines,  347,  and, 
in  Marshall  and  Pitkin's  schedules  of  it.  An  estimate  for  1830, 
made  in  France,  was  only  241  millions  of  pounds;  and  in  Cham- 
ber of  Peers  for  1834,  was  320  millions  of  pounds;  and  by  1 
Smith's  Com.  Dig.,  page  16,  for  1832,  was  288  millions  of  pounds ; 
while  the  Chancellor  of  the  Exchequer  in  England,  in  his  late 
speech,  states  the  quantity  for  home  consumption  in  1834  was 
320  millions  of  pounds,  and  in  1835,  320i  millions  of  pounds. 
But  by  the  annual  Liverpool  report  in  February,  1836,  and  other 
sources,  the  consumption  in  1835  is  estimated  higher  than  1834 
by  13^  millions  of  pounds.  Others  put  1834  at  303  millions  of 
pounds,  and  1835  at  330  millions.  In  the  Edinburgh  Review, 
page  433,  (1832,)  a  table  is  given  from  Freeman  and  Cook's 
Com.  of  Great  Britain,  from  1822  to  1831,  inclusive,  which  is  as 
follows:  1822,  144 A  millions  of  pounds;  1823,  147, \;  1824, 
174A;  1825,  169 A;  1826,  164f;  1827,  201  A;  1828,  217f; 
1829,  221f ;  1830,  242  ;  1831,  257^.  The  consumption  in  Scot- 
land separately,  and  in  part  from  English  imports,  exceeded,  in 
1835, 32  millions  of  pounds.  Since  1823,  when  changes  occurred 
in  the  duties,  Ireland  has  made  considerable  cotton  cloth :  in 
1825,  quite  62  millions  of  yards.  But  it  was  chiefly  from  yarn 
spun  in  England,  (McCulloch,  444,)  or  from  raw  cotton  export- 
ed there  from  England;  which,  from  1821  to  1825,  inclusive, 
was  from  I3  to  22  millions  of  pounds  per  annum.  See  tables  on 
this  in  Smithers,  150  and  151.  London  Encyclopedia,  article 
"  Cotton."  In  same  article  see  a  table  on  imports  and  consump- 
tion, and  stock  on  hand,  same  years:  at  the  close  of  1823,  in 
England,  it  was  92  millions  of  pounds.  See  Liverpool  annual 
report,  where  the  stock  on  hand  at  the  close  of  1834  was  591 
millions  of  pounds,  and  1835  was  73^  millions  of  pounds.  In 
1833  it  was  about  60  millions  of  pounds,  and  had  diminished 


65 

gradually  since    1836,  when    it   was   100   millions  of  pounds. 
(Baines,  page  318.)      See  table  H,  note  2. 

[3.]  See  on  France,  Baines,  page  525.  But  the  quantity  of 
imports  is  generally  higher  than  consumption  by  5  or  6  millions 
of  pounds,  (unless  the  stock  on  hand  is  very  large,  when  the  last 
is  sometimes  highest ; )  as,  of  late  years  especially,  France  re- 
exports to  the  neighboring  countries,  by  land,  8  or  9  millions  of 
pounds  per  annum,  occasionally.  ( French  Tables  of  Commerce, 
page  156,  for  1832-'3.)  About  i^o  of  these  re-exports  are  to 
Switzerland,  and  the  rest  to  Sardinia,  Genoa,  &c.  As  far  back 
as  1789  France  used  but  little  cotton,  except  in  household  man- 
ufactures. Quar.  Rev.,  (1824-'5,)  page  394.  For  1815,  see 
Baines,  page  515,  and  for  1806,  see  London  Encyclopedia,  arti- 
cle "  Cotton."  In  the  French  Chamber  of  Peers  it  was  testified, 
that  the  consumption  in  1834  was  80  millions  of  pounds.  In  the 
Edinburgh  Review,  page  432,  (1832,)  is  a  table  of  raw  cotton 
consumed  yearly  in  France,  from  1822  to  1831,  in  which  the 
quantity  is  different  from  1  to  10  or  12  millions  in  different  years, 
some  less  and  some  more,  e.  g. 


Years. 

1822  - 

1823  - 

1824  - 

1825  - 

1826  - 


M.  lbs. 

Years. 

64^ 

1827 

51f 

1828 

KSh 

1829 

65 

1830 

84^ 

1831 

M.  lbs. 

-  84 

-  72 

-  79^ 

-  75i 

-  73A 


Those  in  the  table  from  1798  to  1*806,  and  1817,  are  from  Sup. 
to  Ency.  Brit.  "  Cotton."  See  table  K,  into  what  articles  the 
cotton  is  made,  comparative  prices,  &c.  • 

[4.]  The  large  estimates  for  1790,  1800,  and  1805,  in  the 
United  States,  were  made  by  myself,  and  the  small  ones,  with 
that  for  1815,  are  from  a  report  of  a  committee  of  the^ House  of 
Representatives,  February  13,  1816.  That  for  1810  is  from 
Seybert's  Statistics,  page  92,  and  includes  what  cotton  was  used 
in  household  manufactures,  as  do  my  own.  Mr.  Gallatin  made 
a  similar  one  for  1810.  Pitkin,  487.  Some  estimates  of  earlier 
date  probably  did  not  include  what  was  used  in  dwelling-houses. 
Before  1825  we  consumed  often  2  millions  of  pounds  a  year,  of 
raw  cotton  grown  abroad,  ( Seyb.  257  and  92;)  an(J  one-four- 
teenth of  the  imports  and  crop  in  the  United  States  and  England, 
is  used  or  consumed  in  its  raw  state  without  being  made  into 
9 


66 

either  yarn  or  cloth.  Table  H.  In  Coxe's  report  on  Manufac- 
tures for  1810,  he  gives  the  manufactures  of  cotton  in  families  at 
five  millions  of  dollars  value,  and  number  of  yards  16^  millions  ; 
which,  at  50  cents,  the  worth  of  coarse  cloth  to  each  pound  of 
cotton  in  it,  would  make  8  or  10  millions  of  pounds  used.  Coxe 
reports  a  few  large  manufactories,  but  without  any  data  to  show 
their  consumption  of  raw  cotton;  but  see  table  L,  spindles,  note. 
They  probably  used  6  to  8  millions  of  pounds  more.  In  the 
French  Chamber  of  Peers  the  estimate  was  only  36  millions  of 
pounds  consumed  in  the  United  States  in  1834,  (see  below.) 
The  whole  manufacture  of  cotton  in  the  United  States  must  be 
as  large  as  the  estimate,  though  beyond  the  usual  computation, 
if  we  look  to  the  number  of  spindles,  and  to  the  great  household 
manufacture  of  it  in  the  families  of  the  South  and  West,  for  all 
purposes. 

Again,  it  is  to  be  deduced  from  the  fact,  that  in  the  great 
cheapness  and  healthfulness  of  cotton  manufactures,  our  popula- 
tion consume  each  five  or  six  dollars  worth  of  them  yearly,  for 
clothing,  bedding,  sails,  &c.  which,  at  a  census  of  14  millions, 
would  be  from  70  to  84  millions  of  dollars  in  value.  In  England 
the  consumption  is  computed  to  be  only  a  fraction  less  than  that, 
and  in  France  it  is  $4  dollars  per  head.  In  Belgium,  Alexander 
computes  it  at  20  francs,  or  a  little  over  g3f  per  head.  As  we 
import  from  England,  France,  and  Germany,  about  7  millions  of 
dollars  of  cotton  manufactures  more  than  we  export,  and  those 
articles  are  finer  than  our  own,  it  is  a  fair  estimate,  that  we  man- 
ufacture in  this  country,  from  50  to  70  millions  of  dollars  worth 
of  cotton  manufactures  ;  which,  at  two  pounds  of  raw  cotton  or 
near  it  per  dollar  of  manufactured  cloth,  on  an  average,  would,  in 
all,  equal  about  100  millions  of  pounds  or  more  of  raw  cotton 
manufactured  here.  Of  this,  about  5  to  20  millions  of  dollars 
worth  are  made  in  domestic  form  ;  and  45  to  50  millions  of  dollars 
in  factories,  in  A.  D.  1835. 

In  1831,  the  convention  in  New  York  estimated  that  only  26 
millions  of  dollars  worth  of  yarn  and  cloth  were  made  in  manufac- 
tories ;  and  in  1834,  Pitkin,  page  484,  estimated  all  manufactures 
of  cotton  in  the  United  Statesat40millionsof  dollars  value  yearly. 
This  would  require  in  1831,  as  in  the  table,  about  77  millions  of 
pounds  of  raw  cotton,  as  estimated  in  the  convention  at  New  York, 
for  manufactories  in  12  States.  See  McCulloch,  448,  who  supposes 
it  was  a  committee  of  Congress. 

As  our  population  is  increasing  from  1830  to  1840  at  the  rate 
of  nearly  4  per  cent,  or  quite  400,000  persons  per  annum,  and  as 
10  to  12  pounds  of  raw  cotton  are  required  per  head,  and  our 


67 

imports  of  cotton  manufactures  do  not  increase,  we  must  add 
yearly  to  our  manufactures  about  4  to  5  millions  more  of  raw 
cotton.  This  would  make  an  addition  from  the  estimate  in  1830, 
so  that  the  whole  consumption  would,  in  1835,  equal  100  millions 
of  pounds  of  raw  cotton.  An  intelligent  merchant  and  manufac- 
turer of  the  North  thinks  the  consumption  now  is  106  millions  of 
pounds.  The  quantity  manufactured  here  in  1817  is  estimated 
by  Reuss,  in  his  tables  on  American  trade,  at  only  31  millions  of 
pounds,  and  in  1828  at  36  millions  of  pounds  ;  but  they  must  be 
too  low,  as  are  the  usual  estimates  for  the  last  three  or  four  years, 
at  only  80  and  85  millions  of  pounds,  or  they  must  include  only 
what  was  worked  up  in  factories,  and  the  former  estimate  not  all 
of  that.  On  the  great  consumption  of  cotton  in  household  manu- 
factures in  the  United  States,  and  the  opinion  entertained  in 
1791  on  the  importance  and  expectationsof  success  in  the  estab- 
lishment of  manufactures  by  machinery,  and  its  influence  on  the 
growth  of  cotton  in  the  United  States,  see  more  in  Hamilton's 
report,  A.  D.  1791. 

[5.]  See  Urquhart  on  Turkey,  page  150  and  179,  that  two 
pounds  per  head  is  manufactured  there  ;  and  also  that  50  millions 
of  dollars  worth  of  muslins  alone  were  yearly  consumed  there 
and  in  Africa.  There  were  not  all,  however,  of  domestic  man- 
ufacture, it  is  presumed. 

In  Egypt  it  has  been  estimated  that  from  8  to  9  millions  of 
pounds  of  the  crop  of  1835  will  be  consumed  in  that  country. 
See  table  A,  note  9. 

[6.]  This  statement  for  Russia  in  1824  is  from  Porter's  tables, 
545  ;  see  Baines,  406.  In  the  southwestern  parts  of  Russia,  bor- 
dering on  Germany,  manufactories  and  machinery  have  been  con- 
siderably introduced,  and  yarn  from  England  is  woven  there,  as 
in  India  and  elsewhere,  as  well  as  raw  cotton,  imported  chiefly 
from  the  United  States,  either  direct  or  through  the  ports  on  the 
Baltic.  See  exports  of  raw  cotton,  table  F,  note.  A  few  others 
have  been  established  southeast  of  Moscow.  See  London  En- 
cyclop,  article  "  Cotton,"  and  one  cotton  mill  is  in  operation  in 
St.  Petersburg. 

[7.]  Used  up  mostly  into  calicoes,  tapes,  and  galloons.  Spain  in 
1803.  1  Dictionary  of  Spanish  Commerce,  63;  3  do.  148;  made 
5,640,810  yards  of  cotton  cloth,  51,900  pair  of  cotton  stockings, 
and  2,686,142  yards  of  tape. 


68 

[8.]  In  Puebla  in  Mexico,  in  1803,  were  manufactured  1 2  mil- 
lions of  pounds  of  raw  cotton.  (4  Dictionary  of  Spanish  Com- 
merce, page  178.)  In  Campeachy  the  manufactures  are  most 
extensive.     2  History  of  Colombia. 

[9.]  Among  the  other  places  is  Switzerland,  which,  in  1831, 
consujned  near  19  millions  of  pounds  of  raw  cotton.  Baines, 
526  ;  see  imports.  That  country  began  to  use  machinery  for 
cotton  in  1798,  but  the  progress  has  been  slow,  and  the  estab- 
lishments are  small,  though  active.  London  Encyclop.  article 
"cotton."  Muslins  have  been  made  there,  it  is  said,  a  century 
and  a  half.  But  beside  England  and  France,  the  cotton  spun  in 
the  rest  of  Europe  in  1823  was  estimated  at  only  18  millions  of 
pounds.  London  Encyclop.  article  "  cotton."  See  table  K,  note. 
In  1834,  it  was  estimated  by  Mr.  Alexander,  that  Belgium  con- 
sumed 121  millions  of  pounds  of  raw  cotton.  See  table,  exports 
of  manufactures  and  notes. 

[10.]  The  statements  for  1833,  1821,  1811,  1801,  and  1791, 
are  generally  computations  made  from  other  data  as  to  the  crops 
in  the  different  countries  named,  which  were  grown  and  not  ex- 
ported, and  the  qauntities  of  raw  cotton  imported  into  each  :  be- 
yond this,  they  are  rather  conjectures  than  estimates,  founded  on 
very  satisfactory  facts. 

[11.]  The  quantities  computed  to  be  manufactured  in  India  and 
China  are  very  large  ;  but,  perhaps,  they  are  below  rather  than 
above  the  truth.  See  supplement  to  Ency.  Brit,  article  "  Cotton," 
and  tables  A  and  F  on  growth  of  cotton  and  exports.  In  the  In- 
dian islands  the  most  of  their  raw  cotton  is  made  up,  though  a 
little  is  exported  to  China.     3  Crawford's  History,  350. 

[12.]  A  table  is  annexed  of  the  consumption  of  raw  cotton  in 
all  Europe,  from  1831  to  1835,  inclusive,  compiled  by  Lambert 
&  Co.  of  Liverpool,  and  distinguishing  the  estimated  portion  of 
it  from  this  country. 

Consumption  of  cotton  in  Europe^  reduced  to  hales  of  SOO pounds, 

1831,  -  bags  1,272,176,  -  of  which    928,520  American 

1832,  -      "     1,372,079,  -  "  1,015,280     " 

1833,  -      "     1,409,786,  -  "  1,066,240     " 

1834,  -      "     1,502,559,  -  "  1,205,043     " 

1835,  -      "     1,581,501,  -  "         1,254,586 


(( 


70 

K. 

COTTON— MANUFACTURES  OF. 


Whole  value  of,  yearly. 

Capital  employed  in  manufactur- 

ing by  machinery.    [6] 

In 

In 

In 

In 

In  , 

In 

England. 

France. 

U.  States. 

England. 

France. 

U.  States. 

c« 

>i 

Dollars. 

Dollars. 

Dollars. 

Dollars. 

Dollars. 

Dollars. 

Millions. 

Millions 

Millions. 

Millions. 

Millions 

Millions. 

1789 

1790 

1791 

1792 

1793 

>        ' 

1794 

1795 

1796 

1797 

1798 

1799 

1800 

1801 

1802 

1803 

1804 

1805 

1806 

1807 

1808 

1809 

- 

1810 

1811 

1812 

1813 

1814 

1815 

95.? 

_ 

24 



_ 

40 

1816 

1817 

- 

36 

71 


K.__COrrON— MANUFA.CTURES  OF— Continued. 


Whole  value  of,  yearly. 

Capital  employed  in  manufactur- 

ing by 

machinery.   [6] 

In 

In 

In 

In 

In 

In 

England. 

France. 

U.  States. 

England. 

France. 

U.  States. 

t 

1 

Dollars. 

Dollars. 

Dollars. 

Dollars. 

Dollars. 

Dollars. 

Millions. 

Millions. 

Millions. 

Millions. 

Millions. 

Millions. 

1818 

1819 

1820 

1821 

1822 

72 

1823 

155 

1824 

148  to  190 

1825 

1826 

1827 

171 

— 

— 

309.^ 

1828 

— 

40 

1829 

1830 

- 

- 

I  (40)  \ 

325.^ 

- 

40for62 

1831 

_ 

_ 

216 

1832 

144 

54 

— 

160 

_ 

44 1 

1833 

•     (     178    ) 

ni49)$ 

- 

- 

(  360  )  } 
I  168^ 

115 

1834 

160i 

62 

— 

250 

1835 

— 

— 

45  to  50 

185 

— 

80 

[4] 

[5] 

[2] 

[3] 

[7] 

[10] 

[8]    [9] 

[5] 

[1.]  The  values  in  England,  in  the  tables,  are  taken,  for  1834, 
from  McCulloch  and  Aiken,  Edin.  Rev.  472,  ( 1835,)  and  Baines, 
412;  for  1833,  in  1st  line,  from  Pebrer  on  Eng.  page  314;  for 
2d  line,  for  1827,  from  Edin.  Rev.  page  22,  (1827.)  The  first 
edition  of  McCulloch  agreed  with  Pebrer,  but  in  the  second 
edition  he  lowered  the  amount.  Baines,  398,  and  note.  That 
for  1823  was  by  Mr.  Huskisson.  Baines,  399.  That  for  1824 
is  from  Supplement  to  Encyclop.  Brit.  "  Cotton." 


In  McCulloch's  Dict'y  of  Com.  and  Baines,  406,  and  Pitkin, 
486,  it  is  computed  that  the  present  value  of  the  cotton  manu- 
facture equals  about  twice  the  amount  of  it  exported.  It  is  said 
that  only  37  per  cent,  is  consumed  of  what  is  made.  Aiken's 
Lectures.  See  exports.  In  1766,  England  made  about  three 
times  as  much  as  she  exported  of  cotton  goods,  though  Edin. 
Rev.  page  166,  (1830,)  says  she  then  made  only  one  million  oi 
dollars  worth.  Do.  page  18,  (1827.)  The  estimate  for  1815  is 
in  Edinb.  Encyclop.  art.  "  Cotton."  The  items  for  computing 
the  value  of  the  annual  manufacture,  are  given  in  Edin.  Rev. 
(1827,)  page  22,  and  in  Edin.  Rev.  page  472,  (1835,)  and  in 
Baines,  412. 

In  Scotland  alone,  it  is  said  the  manufacture  of  cotton,  in  1835, 
equalled  in  value  IH  millions  of  dollars;  but,  in  1832,  it  was 
estimated  by  Kennedy  at  12^,  though  prices  higher;  and  in  Ire- 
land at  1^  millions  of  dollars.  Baines,  409,  thinks  the  exports 
are  nearly  that  before  named  from  Scotland,  and  the  manufac- 
ture double.     Page  410. 

[2.]  The  values  in  France  for  1817  are  too  high,  and  that  for 
1828  too  low,  it  is  believed,  but  were  extracted,  the  first  from  2 
Chaptal  on  French  Industry,  page  150,  and  Sup.  to  Encyclop. 
Brit.  "  Cotton,"  and  the  last  from  some  author  not  remembered. 
Estimated  at  111  millions  of  dollars  by  Mimerel,  but  too  high. 
Baines,  521. 

Those  for  1832  and  '34,  are  estimates  made  on  the  number  of 
spindles,  &c. 

[3.]  The  value  for  1830,  in  the  United  States,  is  from  N.  Y. 
Conven.  and  includes  but  12  States,  and  no  household  goods, 
otherwise  it  would  equal  40  millions.     Pitkin,  483. 

The  whole  value,  in  1835,  is  my  estimate  from  the  quantity  of 
cotton  worked  up,  &c.     Pitkin,  482. 

The  value  for  1815  is  by  a  Committee  of  Congress,  and  is  con- 
fined to  goods  made  in  factories.  The  whole  value  of  cotton, 
woollen,  and  flax'  manufactures,  in  1810,  was  coitiputed  at  only 
40  millions  of  dollars,  the  value  of  cotton  alone  in  1830. 

[4.]  The  value  of  manufactured  cotton^,  when  the  quantity  of 
raw  cotton  in  them  is  the  same,  differs  greatly  according  to  dif- 
ferent periods  of  time  in  the  same  country,  and  according  to  the 
quality  of  the  raw  material,  and  the  machinery  used,  and  the 
skill  employed.     See  table  M,  note  [2.] 


IS 

Thus,  in  England,  in  20  years  after  Arkwriglit's  invention  in 
spinning,  manufactured  cottons  fell  nearly  eight-ninths  of  their 
former  price.  Every  ten  years  since,  some  have  computed  their 
fall  in  price  as  equal  to  50  per  cent.  In  the  American  Encyclo- 
pedia, article  "  Cotton,"  it  is  said  that,  from  1815  to  1829,  the 
coarse  cloths  fell  two-thirds.  See  in  Pebrer's  views  of  England, 
page  343,  a  table  showing  the  fall  there  at  different  periods. 
See  table  M,  note  [3,]  on  official  and  real  prices  at  different 
periods.  In  1810,  yarn,  on  an  average,  was  worth  $1  125  per 
pound.  Report  by  Gallatin.  See  prices  of  other  articles  in  his 
report.  In  1814,  it  was  estimated  under  ^1  per  pound  by  Cox. 
In  1832  it  was  said  that  the  cost  of  making  most  species  of  yarn 
had  been  reduced,  since  1812,  about  a  half,  and  that  of  weaving 
by  power  looms,  &c.,  still  more.  See  Edin.  Rev.  427,  (1832,) 
a  list  of  prices.  Some  of  the  differences  as  to  the  whole  value 
of  manufactured  goods,  spring  from  not  adverting  to  all  the  fall 
in  prices,  though  the  yarn  and  cloth  have  increased  in  quantity. 
See  a  table  of  reduction  in  prices  of  spinning.  In  1786  it  cost 
105.  per  pound  of  No.  100,  in  1824  only  8c?.  or  only  16  cents  in- 
stead of  240  cents.     Supplement  to  Encyclop.  Brit.  "  Cotton." 

[5.]  Tlie  best  cotton  goods  are  supposed  to  be  made  in  Swit- 
zerland, where  the  skill  and  machinery  are  good,  and  the  climate 
congenial.  But  the  raw  material  being  carried  so  far  by  land  is 
expensive,  and  the  manufacturer  cannot  compete  with  England, 
though  20  per  cent,  cheaper  than  in  France.     Baines,  524. 

In  France  many  fine  goods  are  made  by  skill  and  experience  ; 
but  the  machinery  is  poorer,  and  costs  more.  Edinb.  Rev.  page 
61,  (1829.)  Hence  the  prices  in  those  two  countries  of  the 
cloth  made  from  a  pound  of  raw  cotton,  exceed  on  an  average, 
50  cents,  while  in  England  they  are  about  50  cents,  and  in  the 
United  States  are  now  somewhat  less.  In  1806  the  cotton  was 
made  chiefly  into  velveteens,  nankeens,  crapes,  muslins,  &c. 
See  at  length  London  Encyclopedia,  article  "  Cotton." 

But  in  1810  our  cotton-  cloths  made  in  houses  and  manufac- 
tories, on  an  average,  were  estimated  at  33  cents^^er  yard  in 
Coxe's  tables,  page  10.  The  prices  are  now  Itjwfei*,  notwith- 
standing the  introduction  so  extensively  of  finer  cloths  and  of 
printing  calicoes. 

We  make  more  coarse  and  substantial  cloths  of  cotton  now 
than  England,  and  they  can  be  afforded  cheaper  by  two  or  three 
cents  per  yard.  They  are  in  greater  demand  abroad.  Ameri- 
can Quarterly  Review,  (1834,)  page  256.  3  Parliamentary  re- 
ports, (1833,)  page  332.  We  put  more  staple  into  them,  the 
10 


74 

raw  material  being  cheaper  here.  But  the  English  laces,  being 
made  chiefly  of  Sea-island  cotton,  with  a  very  little  silk,  enhance 
the  value  of  each  pound  to  over  ^5  ;  and  the  whole  manufac- 
ture of  it  equals  nine  millions  of  dollars  per  annum,  ( McCuI- 
loch,  page  743,)  and  30f  millions  of  square  yards. 

The  coarse  India  cottons  are  made  of  the  worst  materials  and 
less  smooth,  being  chiefly  spun  by  hand,  and  the  raw  material 
poorer.  Baines.  But  the  thread  so  spun  is  softer  and  the  cloth 
more  durable.  Report  on  aff*airs  of  India,  (1832,)  appendix, 
page  310.  But  the  power  to  spin  a  fine  thread  there  has  been 
carried  almost  as  far  as  in  England.     See  table  L,  note  [5.] 

ON    CAPITAL. 

[6.]  Capital  invested  is  computed  on  very  different  principles 
and  data  by  different  persons,  and  the  price  of  machinery  has  of 
late  fallen  much  per  spindle.  See  notes  on  spindles.  In  the 
computation  of  capital  in  manufacturing  cotton,  there  is  gene- 
rally included  only  what  is  in  factories. 

[7.]  The  real  capital  has  doubtless  increased  in  England  since 
1827,  though  in  the  table  there  is  an  apparent  diminution.  That 
and  other  differences  often  arise  from  the  estimates  being  made 
by  different  persons,  and  on  data  somewhat  unlike,  as  well  as 
from  changes  in  the  value  of  machinery,  and  in  its  increase. 

The  computation  for  1827  is  by  the  Edinburgh  Review,  page 
22,  1827  ;  that  for  1830  is  by  some  writer  not  noted ;  that  for 
1831  in  1st  edition  of  McCulloch's  dictionary,  Pitk.  Stat.  486, 
for  1833,  by  Pebrer,  page  315,  in  1st  line,  and  in  2d  line  by 
Baines,  415,  and  Edin.  Rev.  page  472,  (1835,)  and  2d  edition 
of  McCulloch;  and  for  1834  by  Aiken,  who  places  buildings 
and  machinery,  or  the  fixed  capital  at  only  about  half  the  value 
of  that  in  Edin.  Rev.  (1827)  page  22,  or  at  about  97  millions  of 
dollars  instead  of  181  millions. 

The  ratio  adopted  for  1827  was —  for  1824  was — 

Capital  in  buying  raw  material  £9  millions,  £4  millions 

Capital  in  paying  wages     -          19         "  10       " 
Capital  in  mills,  machinery, 

looms,  shops,  &c.            -         37         "  20       " 


£65         "  £34 


So  Kennedy  in  Baines,  413,  differs  again,  making  fixed  capi- 
tal only  about  15  million  pounds,  &c.     The  present  value  of 


75 

capital  invested  in  buildings,  water  privileges,  and  machinery, 
is  often  less  than  their  original  cost,  and  is  another  source  of 
difference. 

[8.]   The  capital  in  1815,  for  the  United  States,  is  computed 
by  a  committee  of  Congress,  and  is  not  any  too  high.     Report, 
February  13,  1816.     That  in  1830  is  by  the  New  York  conven- 
tion, and  is  correct  according  to  the  number  of  spindles  compared 
with  England  and  her  capital,  and  is  in  fact  at  40  million  dollars 
for  fixtures  alone,  and  about  22  million  dollars  for  the  rest.    Not 
too  high.     That  for  1832  is  from   Reuss  on  American  Trade, 
page  274.     The  whole  capital  here,  in  proportion  to  each  spin- 
dle, is  more  for  mills  and  machinery  together  than  in  England, 
and  more  for  wages.     Here  is  sometimes  higher  for  additional 
machinery  and  workmen  for  finer  kinds  of  manufacture.     The 
average  value  of  her  capital  to  each  spindle,  as  computed  by  me 
for  1835,  would  be  about  ^20  to   each;  which  would,  on  the 
same  data,  make  our  capital  then  equal  to  ^35  per  spindle.    But 
in  the  New  York  convention,  in  1830,  are  given  the  details  of 
their  estimates,  and  the  buildings  and  machinery  alone  cost  here, 
on   their  computation,  near  55^35  per  spindle,  and  it  requires  to 
pay  wages,  furnish  raw  cotton  and  other  materials,  superintend- 
ence, &c.  quite  ^11  more  per  spindle,  making  the  whole  ^46 
each,  or  now  near  80  million  dollars  capital.     In  1810,  it  was 
estimated  that  ^60  per  spindle  was  necessary.     See  Coxe  and 
Gallatin.     It  is  now  $60  in  some  factories  at  Lowell.     This 
agrees  nearly  with  the  older  computations  in  England  ;  and  as 
goods  become  finer,  and  machinery  still  cheaper  in  the  United 
States,  the   approximation  will  be    still  closer.     See  table  L, 
note.     But  another  striking  cause  of  difference  arises  from  the 
kind  of  goods  made   here  compared  with  England,  requiring 
there  less  capital  for  machinery,  looms,  &c.     Besides,  that  the 
spindles  there  are  cheaper,  and  less  capital  is  needed  for  work- 
men, when  the  number  of  spindles  is  the  same,  to  tend  power 
looms,  color  and  stamp  dies,  &c.  in  proportion,  than  in  the  United 
States.     Because  there,  in  1833,  only  a  little  over  one-half  of 
the  cotton  spun  was  made  into  cloth  in  the  factories,  or  only  76  J 
millions  of  pounds  out  of  145  millions  of  pounds.     The  rest  was 
sold  or  exported  as  yarn  and  thread.     See  Baines,  607.     And 
in  another  estimate,  over  one-half  the  exports  are  in  yarn.     See 
table  M,  note  [1].    Baines,  409.     While,  in  1830  in  the  United 
States,  the  computation  of  yarn  sold,  compared  with  cloth  made, 
was  not  one-tenth  of  the  weight.    In  1810  it  exceeded  one-half. 
Gallatin.  Another  cause  of  the  difference  is,  pehraps,  that  much 


76 

of  the  fine  weaving  of  ginghams,  muslins,  and  mixed  cloths  there 
is  done  in  hand  looms  not  belonging  to  the  factories.  See 
Baines,  418.  In  the  computation  before  stated,  of  the  capital 
per  spindle  for  1830,  in  the  United  States,  it  may  be  useful  to 
exhibit  it  in  another  form.     According  to  Pitk.  page  482. 

The  capital  in  mills  atid  fixtures  was    -         -         $40i^o  millions. 
Do.       in  other  machinery,  about  -  4  r^o        " 

Capital  in  mills  and  machinerj''   -         -         -         $45  " 


juWhich,  at  li  millions  of  spindles,  is  about  $35  to  each. 

Capital  floating  or  circulating,  in  paying  wages, 

was  near  - $12  millions. 

Capital  circulating  in  buying  stock,  &c.     -* 


Q  li 


$14 
About  $11  more  per  spindle,  or  $46  for  every  spindle. 

The  valuation  placed  on  machinery  should  now  be  less,  though 
most  of  that  in  use  cost  high.  See  spindles.  The  English  pro- 
portion now  is  about  $12  capital  per  spindle  invested  in  mills, 
machinery,  and  all  fixtures  connected,  or  not  much  over  one- 
third  the  proportion  here.  But  it  is  about  $8  to  each  spindle  in 
the  floating  capital  for  w^ages,  stock,  &c. ;  or  over  two-thirds  the 
proportion  here.  More  of  their  fine  spinning  is  also  done  on  the 
mule  spindle,  which  costs  but  little  over  half  what  the  throstle 
spindle  does,  and  which  last  has  been  equally  as  much  used  here 
as  the  other,  and  of  late  years,  it  is  believed,  far  more  than  the 
other.  In  1831,  in  England,  in  Lancashire,  the  number  of  mule 
spindles  was  more  than  12  times  that  of  the  throstle.  Baines, 
209 — note.  Her  capital  in  mills  and  machinery  alone,  is  said 
not  to  exceed  $4.16  to  each  spindle.  See  Baines,  414  and  368. 
But  that  must  exclude  water  privileges  and  steam  engines,  prob- 
ably, and  all  looms,  out-houses,  shops,  &c.  and  refer  chiefly  to 
the  mule  spindle. 

In  1824  it  was  considered  in  England  that  we  employed  too 
many  persons  and  too  much  capital  per  spindle.  Sup.  to  Ency- 
clop.  Brit.  art.  "  Cotton." 

[9,.]  The  advantages  of  different  countries  for  the  cotton  man- 
ufacture, depend,  in  a  great  measure,  on  their  natural  condition 


77 

— long  habits  and  laws.  England  is  superior  to  most  in  the 
abundance  and  cheapness  of  iron  for  machinery ;  in  coal  for 
warming  buildings  and  moving  steam  power ;  in  suitable  climate  ; 
ingenuity,  experience,  and  skill  of  mechanics  from  great  division 
of  labor,  &c. ;  in  greater  commerce  to  find  best  markets ;  capital 
at  low  interest,  and  wages  not  high  ;  and  property  secure.  But 
taxes  there  and  raw  material  are  high,  and  living  is  more  ex- 
pensive than  in  some  other  places.  Edinb.  Rev.  (1835)  page 
466.  McCuUoch,  446,  A-^reat  increase  is  supposed  to  have 
taken  place  the  past  year  in  erecting  cotton  factories  in  England. 

The  United  States^  by  numerous  and  cheap  water  falls,  have 
a  good  substitute  for  steam,  and  will^  soon  have  coal  as  low  for 
warming ;  have  equal  ingenuity,  and  probably  now  superior 
merit  in  machinery ;  but  iron  and  coal  are  dearer,  and  raw  ma- 
terial and  living  both  lower,  and  property  as  secure ;  wages  and 
capital  higher;  much  less  taxation;  and  a  protective  tariff.  It  is 
sain  in  Amer.  Encyclop.  art.  "  Cotton,"  that  the  introduction  of 
the  power  loom  in  1815,  has  given  great  permanency  and  pros- 
perity to  our  cotton  establishments.  See  table  L,  notes  to 
spindles,  and  notes  above,  in  this  table,  for  something  more  on 
England  and  United  States. 

As  to  France,  Switzerland,  India,  &c.  it  is  not  necessary  nor 
convenient  here  to  enter  into  details  beyond  what  is  stated  in 
other  parts  of  these  notes.  But  it  may  deserve  notice,  that  the 
increase  in  the  use  of  raw  cotton  has  been  at  a  much  more  rapid 
rate  in  England  than  in  France.  Edin.  Rev.  (1832)  page  433. 
See  Baines,  525  and  '6,  and  515,  on  these  points.  See  table  I — 
note.     See  below,  note  [11.] 

The  value  of  cotton  manufactures  in  England  is,  comparatively, 
equal  to  two-thirds  of  all  her  public  revenue,  and  to  nearly  all 
her  exports  of  other  articles.  Table  M,  note  3.  In  1797,  the 
cotton  manufacture,  it  is  said  in  Seybert,  page  92,  took  the  lead 
of  any  other  in  England.  But  in  1816  she  consumed  no  more 
raw  cotton  than  the  United  States  do  now. 

[10.]  The  capital  of  France  invested  in  cotton  manufactures, 
is  given  for  only  one  year,  and  computed  at  a  medium  between 
J^20  per  spindle,  as  in  England,  and  ^46  per  spindle  in  the 
United  States.  As  I  have  no  French  estimates  on  this  subject 
beyond  the  data  given  in  Baines  and  other  authors,  as  to  the 
number  of  spindles  merely,  and  their  cost  at  different  periods, 
the  computation  has  not  been  extended  to  other  years.  Baines, 
517  and  518,  gives  estimates  showing  that  France  requires  28 
per  c^t.  more  capital  than  England  to  produce  the  same  manu- 


78 

factures,  according  to  some  persons,  and  according  to  others  75 
per  cent.  But  Doctor  Bowring  estimates  the  difference  at  about 
30  to  40  per  cent.     Baines,  520. 

[11.]  The  subject  of  wages  in  the  different  kinds  of  manufac- 
ture, and  in  different  countries,  has  not  been  discussed  in  detail. 
But  see  on  it  Wade's  Hist,  of  Mid'g  Classes,  570  to  576.  It 
may  be  interesting  to  many  to  know  that  the  average  wages  in 
1832,  in  the  United  States,  of  all  employed  in  a  cotton  factory, 
were  about  14s.  llrf.  sterling  per  week;  in  England,  about  10*., 
sometimes  12*.;  in  France,  only  5s.  Qd.;  in  Switzerland,  4s. 
5d.  ;  in  Austria,  3s.  9c?. ;  in  Saxony,  3s.  Qd. ;  and  in  India  from 
Is.  to  2s.  per  week.  Ditto,  page  576,  and  Westminster  Review 
for  April,  1833.  In  Niles's  Register,  November,  1817,  page 
156,  it  is  said  to  be  only  two  cents  per  day  in  India ;  but  that  is 
probably  too  low. 


80 


L. 


COTTON— MANUFACTORIES  OF. 


Persons  employed, 

connected  with  fac- 

Spindles  employed 

in  factories— num- 

tories  chiefly— number  of. 

ber 

of. 

ri 

a 

s 

-2 

«3 

c 

c 

c 

^ 

00 

S 

00 

-S 

. 

To 

'V 

<u 

Us 

^3 

aj 

V 

?* 

c 

<u 

o 

c 

<u 

w 

N 

a 

t-H 

."5 

'5 

1 

c 

1750 

20,000 

1760 

16,000  ? 

1770 

30,000 

1784 

80,000 

1787  1 

162,000  to 

260,000 

1789 

_ 

- 

_ 

49,500 

1790 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

70 

1791 

1792 

1793 

1794 

' 

1795 

1796 

1797 

1798 

1799 

" 

1800 

1801 

1802 

1803 

1804 

1805 

_ 

_ 

_ 

_ 

4,500 

1806 

- 

- 

120,000 

~ 

81,000 

1807 

~ 

- 

_ 

_ 

8,000 

1808 

1809 

800,000  ? 

- 

- 

- 

31,000 

1810 

qe. 

~ 

-  • 

Millions. 

87,000 

1811 

- 

- 

- 

5 

80,000  > 
query. 

Millions. 

1812 

- 

- 

- 

4i? 

_ 

1 

1813 

- 

- 

- 

query. 

1814 

- 

- 

- 

122,646 

1815 

- 

100,000 

- 

- 

130,000 

1816 

- 

- 

- 

61 

1817 

- 

- 

- 

61 

1818 
1819 

- 

- 

- 

- 

lA- 

1820 

- 

- 

- 

- 

220,000 

1821 

- 

- 

- 

- 

230,000 

81 


L.— COTTON— MANUFACTORIES  OF— Continued. 


Persons  employed, 

connected  with  fac- 

Spindles 

.  employed 

in  factories— num- 

tories  chiefly — number  of. 

ber 

jf. 

S 

c 

1 

^ 

O) 

es 

en 

ba 

T3 

<u 

bo 

T} 

<u 

& 

tr 

c 

V 

o 

c 

4> 

o 

N 

^ 

? 

c 

■M 

"5 

U 
3 

*£ 

1822 

427,000 

1823 

1824 

- 

- 

- 

6  ? 

_ 

- 

259,200 

1825 

- 

- 

- 

query. 

800,000 

1826 

1827  1 

705,100  to 
1,000,000 

. 

Millions. 

1828 

- 

- 

- 

- 

Utol 

1829 

_ 

- 

- 

7 

1833 

- 

\  179,000  I 
1 175,146  S 

- 

~ 

li 

1831 

- 

200,000 

200,000 

7jt  to  8i 

1832 

1,200,000 

- 

- 

- 

- 

3i 

1833 

1,500,000 

1834 

_ 

- 

600,000 

9^ 

1835 

- 

- 

_ 

- 

1^ 

[1] 

[4] 

[3] 

[5]  [6] 

[9] 

m 

[8] 

[2] 

[11]  [12] 

[10] 

[1.]  The  early  computations  of  the  number  of  persons  em- 
ployed are  very  loose  and  contradictory.  That  for  1750,  is  from 
Smithers'  History  of  Liverpool,  page  154;  that  for  1760  and 
1770,  by  Edinburgh  Review  (1827;)  for  1784,  by  Smith,  and 
Baines,  218.  The  more  recent  estimates  for  1809,  are  too  high, 
and  are  by  Seyb.  page  92  ;  and  for  1827,  in  second  line,  are 
from  Edin.  Rev.  page  13,  (1827,)  and  page  427,  (1835;)  and 
IVIcCulloch,  443;  and  Baines,  431.  The  last  make  the  actual 
laborers  only  900,000.  As  the  cloth  made  is  finer,  more  per- 
sons are  required  to  a  given  number  of  spindles.  So  if  it  is 
stamped  or  printed  (see  below.)  It  is  computed  that,  in  ten 
years  after  machinery  was  introduced  into  the  manufacture  of 
cotton,  the  number  of  persons  employed  in  it  was  still  augment- 
ed tenfold ;  some  have  said  forty  times,  which  is  too  high.  But 
if  no  machinery  had  been  used  in  1826,  beyond  what  was  used 
11 


82 

in  1760,  it  would  have  required  from  42  to  63  millions  of  per- 
sons to  perform  what  was  then  done  in  the  cotton  manufacture. 
( Quar.  Review,  1 826,  and  Browning's  Great  Britain,  pages  232. ) 
They  say  one  man  now' equals  by  machinery  120  in  A.  D.  1780, 
or  200  according  to  Kennedy,  cited  in  Edinburgh  Review,  page 
18,  (1827;)  Smithers,  127;  or,  in  1815,  one  equals  from  40  to 
60.  Edinburgh  Encyclop.  "  Cotton."  In  1833,  Pebrer,  page 
314,  estimates  that  80  millions  of  persons  would  be  needed  in 
the  cotton  manufactories  without  machinery.  See  on  some  of 
above,  London  Encyclopedia,  article  "cotton,"  printed  1829, 
and  in  Edinburgh  Encyclopedia,  article  cotton,  (1815,)  where 
the  number  of  persons  employed  is  estimated  at  one  million  ;  but 
too  high.     See  below,  note  [11.] 

[2.]  In  Spain,  in  1803,  it  was  computed  that  6,792  persons 
were  employed  in  the  manufacture  of  cotton  goods,  1  Dictiona- 
ry of  Spanish  Com.  65;  and,  in  Switzerland,  in  1831,  about 
28,000  persons.  West.  Rev.  for  April,  1833. 

[3.]  The  number  in  France,  for  1834,  is  from  Baines,  page 
521 .  Many  there  engage*  in  agriculture  a  part  of  the  year,  as  in 
India.  The  number  for  1806,  is  from  data  in  London  Encyclo- 
pedia,  article  "  Cotton,"  and  supplement  to  Ency.  Brit.  "  Cot- 
ton," where,  in  twenty-two  departments,  the  number  of  persons 
engaged  in  spinning  is  said  tobe  28,460,  and  in  weaving  31,107 
persons,  and  the  spindles  800,724.  These  must  include  most  in 
France ;  and  the  other  persons  incidentally  engaged  must  be  al- 
most double,  to  constitute  the  recent  number  of  six  or  seven  per- 
sons to  a  spindle  in  making  fine  and  colored  cloths.  The  num- 
ber for  1831,  is  from  the  West.  Rev.,  April,  1833,  page  397. 

[4.]  In  the  United  States,  the  estimate  for  1815  was  made  by 
a  committee  of  the  House  of  Representatives,  February  13, 
1816.  The  number  includes  all  engaged  in  the  manufacture,  or 
in  making  the  mills,  machinery,  &c.,  and  not  those  alone  inside 
of  the  mills.  These  last,  in  1832,  were  computed  by  Reuss,  on 
Am.  Trade,  page  274,  at  only. 28,683,  but  by  McCuUoch's  Dic- 
tionary, page  448,  at  67,466.  In  1830,  by  New  York  Conven- 
tion, at  57,520,  and  dependants  at  117,626  persons,  or  175,146 
in  all,  as  in  second  line  of  the  table. 

[5.]  Spindles.  The  spindle  is  the  most  convenient  article  in 
the  cotton  manufacture,  by  which  to  calculate  the  extent  of  it. 
The  power  of  any  one  establishment,  its  cost,  the   number  of 


83 

persons  employed,  the  quantity  of  raw  cotton  consumed,  the 
yarn  or  cloth  made,  and  most  other  important  results  can,  by  the 
help  of  a  few  general  data,  be  very  nearly  deduced  from  the 
number  of  spindles. 

On  the  great  gain  in  substituting  for  the  distaft"  and  the  spindle 
used  by  hand,  the  present  machinery  for  spinning  and  other  pro- 
cesses to  complete  the  manufacture  of  cotton,  whether  moved  by 
horse  power,  water  or  steam,  some  illustrations  have  already 
been  given  in  the  first  note  to  this  table,  and  in  table  K. 

With  a  view  to  furnish  a  few  more  details,  which  may  pos- 
sess some  usefulness  and  interest,  it  may  be  remarked,  on  the 
power  of  the  spindle,  that,  by  improvements  in  machinery,  it  is 
said  that  one  now  sometimes  revolves  8,000  times  in  a  minute, 
instead  of  only  50  times,  as  formerly,  and  that  one  will  now  spin 
on  an  average  from  one-sixth  to  one-third  more  than  it  did  twen- 
ty years  ago,  (below,  note  12.)  Indeed,  in  1834,  it  is  said  that 
one  person  can  spin  more  than  double  the  weight  of  yarn  in  a 
given  time  than  he  could  in  1829.  Senior's  Outline  of  Political 
Econ.  page  198.  The  quantity  of  raw  cotton  spun  by  one  spin- 
dle depends,  of  course,  on  the  fineness  of  the  thread  and  quality 
of  the  machinery.  In  England,  where  a  considerable  portion  of 
the  yarn  is  finer,  the  jiverage  is  about  8^  ounces  weekly,  or  from 
27  to  281bs.  yearly;  (McCulloch,  441,  note,)  while  the  average 
in  the  United  States  is  about  50  pounds  yearly,  of  yarn  number 
20  and  25  in  fineness,  and  about  26  pounds  of  number  35  and  40. 
In  1808  the  average  was  computed  at  45  pounds  per  spindle,  of 
cotton  yielding  38  pounds  of  yarn.  (Report  to  Congress,  1810.) 
The  difference  in  weight  between  the  cotton  and  the  yarn,  by 
loss  from  dirt  and  waste,  is  usually  estimated  from  one-twelfth  to 
one-eighth.  (Baines,  376.)  At  Lowell  100  pounds  of  cotton 
yield  89  pounds  of  cloth,  (Lowell  Statistics,  1836,)  though  the 
average  here  used  to  be  estimated  at  only  85  pounds,  (Niles's 
Register,  1827,  page  211,)  when  cotton  was  not  so  well  clean- 
ed and  machinery  less  perfect.  One  spindle  at  Low  ell  produces 
through  looms  &c.  on  an  average  1  i\  yards  of  cloth,  daily  ;  but 
this  result  must  differ  greatly  with  the  fineness  of  the  thread, 
excellence  of  the  looms,  width  of  the  cloth,  &c. 

In  1830,  it  was  computed  that  37  spindles  were  necessary  to 
supply  one  loom  ;  though  in  1827,  at  Lowell,  the  actual  propor- 
tion was  only  26,  at  Exeter  in  1831,  it  was  29,  and  now  at  Lowell 
it  is  31 .  The  number  of  looms  in  England  in  1832,  was'only  one 
to  about  40  spindles,  so  much  more  yarn  is  made  and  not  woven 
there,  (McCulloch,  441,)  and  those  were  mostly  hand  looms. 
But  in  1834,  the  number  of  them  was  about  100,000  power  looms 


84 

and  250,000  hand  looms,  or  in  all,  about  I  to  30.  (Baines, 
page  237.)  One  loom  formerly  wove  daily,  about  20  yards  of 
cloth  of  the  ordinary  seven-eighths  width,  more  of  the  26  inches 
in  width  used  for  calicoes,  and  less  of  the  five-quarters  wide. 
The  average  now  is  from  30  to  40  yards  of  No.  20.  At  Lowell, 
in  1835,  it  was  38  to  49  yards  of  No.  14,  and  25  to  30  yards  of 
No.  30.  It  requires  from  four  to  five  yards  of  cloth  of  Nos.  20 
to  25  yarn,  to  weigh  one  pound,  and  five  to  six  yards  of  Nos.  35 
and  40. 

The  power  of  the  spindle,  as  connected  with  the  number  of 
persons  actually  employed  in  factories,  is,  that  in  making  plain 
cloth  of  ordinary  width  and  fineness,  one  person  is  needed  to 
conduct  all  the  business  from  the  raw  cotton  to  the  finishing  of  the 
cloth  for  every  20  spindles.  If  the  cloth  be  colored  and  printed 
or  stamped,  one  person  will  be  wanted  for  every  seven  spindles. 
This  would  be  about  250  persons  for  all  purposes  in  a  factory  of 
5,000  spindles,  making  plain  brown  cloth.  One  person  can 
manage  from  two  to  three  power  looms. 

The  proportion  of  spindles  to  a  factory  was  formerly  very 
small,  both  in  England  and  this  country.  Before  1806,  it  was 
only  one  or  two  hundred  sometimes,  and  seldom  exceeded  1,000. 
Soon  after  that  some  mills  were  built,  containing  4,000  spindles. 
The  average  in  new  mills  is  now  from  5,000  to  6,000.  In  Low- 
ell, 1836,  in  27  mills  they  have  129,828  spindles,  or  a  little  un- 
der 5,000  to  each,  though  they  print,  &c.  in  some. 

A  factory  with  5,000  spindles  must  be  about  155  feet  long  and 
45  wide,  four  stories  in  height,  and  contain  about  140  looms, 
with  other  suitable  machinery  for  picking,  warping,  sizing,  &c. 
Such  a  one,  with  a  few  shops  and  out-houses  appurtenant,  and 
land  and  water  privilege,  would  cost  from  $140,000  to  $220,000, 
according  to  the  materials  for  building,  whether  wood,  brick  or 
stone,  and  the  distance  from  navigable  waters,  so  as  to  affect  cost 
of  privilege,  freight,  &c.,  with  other  circumstances  too  numerous 
for  recital.  If  bleaching  or  printing  cloths  be  added,  more  ex- 
pense will  be  necessary,  and  more  persons  than  250,  the  average 
for  such  an  establishment  including  machinists. 

This  would  be  a  permanent  investment  of  capital  in  buildings, 
water  power,  machinery,  and  all  appurtenances,  equal  to  $28  or 
$44  per  spindle,  independent  of  the  temporary  investment  of 
capital  to  buy  raw  cotton,  pay  wages,  &c.  It  would  often  reach, 
and  even  exceed  the  latter  sum,  than  only  the  former.  (See 
table  K,  on  capital.)  In  1810,  it  was  computed  that  the  capital 
actually  invested  in  machinery  and  real  estate,  averaged  $60  per 
spindle.     (Report  of  1810.)     It  is  not  proposed  here  to  go  into 


85 

any  comparisons  of  this  expense  now  with  former  periods,  or 
with  other  countries,  except  in  regard  to  the  spindle  alone,  and 
the  machinery  as  a  whole.     For  the  rest  see  table  K. 

In  1806,  when  machinery  could  not  by  law  be  exported  from 
England,  and  the  machinists  here  were  unskilful  and  few,  the 
spindle  and  its  appurtenances,  from  the  picker  to  the  loom  inclu- 
sive, it  is  computed,  cost  $30  each  ;  or  300  to  400  per  cent, 
higher  than  it  cost  at  that  time  in  England,  and  over  double  its 
present  cost  in  the  United  States. 

The  great  fall  in  its  cost  and  value  since,  with  various  im- 
provements in  machinery,  has  been  the  cause  of  much  loss  to 
many  capitalists  employed  in  the  manufacture.  By  A.  D.  1820, 
the  machinery  cost  only  about  double  its  then  value  in  England. 
In  1826,  the  machinery  was  made  here  on  an  average,  for  about 
$14  per  spindle,  and  though  now  lower,  it  still  costs  from  40  to 
60  per  cent,  more  than  in  England.  The  whole  machinery  there 
and  the  mill  cost  only  $4.16  per  spindle.  (Baines  368,  414.) 
But  that  includes  probably  no  looms,  &c.,  and  merely  the  build- 
ing, without  the  water  or  steam  power,  and  the  mule  spindle, 
moved  by  hand,  and  costing  less  than  half  what  the  throstle  spin- 
dle costs,  and  which  is  chiefly  in  use  here.  In  France,  in  1832, 
the  spindle  alone,  which  is  about  half  the  expense  of  all  the  ma- 
chinery, cost  $8.  It  used  to  cost  there  $10.  ( See  Hocklin's 
Evid.)  Now  the  spindle  alone  costs  here  about  $41  if  of  the 
throstle  kind,  and  $2^  if  of  the  mule  kind.  In  some  places  in 
the  United  States  five  per  cent,  higher.  The  former  alone  cost 
here,  late  as  1826,  it  is  said,  $8  each.  The  spindle  used  in  the 
filling  frame,  quite  extensively  at  this  time,  costs  about  $6. 

These  may  constitute  useful  and  sufficient  data  for  further 
computations.  As  a  matter  of  some  curious  interest  it  may  be 
added  that  one  pound  of  cotton  usually  makes  8  yards  of  qoarse 
muslin,  and  is  then  increased  in  value  from  the  raw^  cotton  eight- 
fold. But  if  spun  into  the  finest  yarn,  it  is  worth  five  guineas, 
and  in  1780,  if  woven  into  muslin  and  tambored  was  worth  £15. 
( 5  Anderson's  History  of  Commerce,  878. )  It  may  now  be  con- 
verted into  a  piece  of  lace  worth  100  guineas.  Senior's  Outline 
of  Political  Economy,  162,  178.  In" India,  in  1786,  they  could 
spin  cotton  threads  over  115  miles  to  the  pound;  in  England 
they  have  since  been  spun  167  miles  long  from  a  single  pound. 
Baines,  page  59.  Niles's  Register,  page  181,  March  24,  1821. 
One  pound  of  cotton  spun  into  No.  100  yarn,  extends  about 
84,000  yards  in  length.  Smithers'  History  of  Liverpool,  page 
127.  The  yarn  spun  yearly  in  England  would  reach  round  the 
globe  203,775  times,  or  over  600  times  each  day.  Baines,  p.  431 


86 

They  use  flour  for  sizing,  &,c.  in  cotton  manufactures,  42f 
pounds  to  each  spindle  per  annum,  or  four  pounds  weekly  to  each 
loom.  In  this  country  but  one  pound  weekly  to  each  loom. 
McCuUoch,  448,  as  to  report  of  1832.  But  at  Lowell,  3,800 
barrels  to  4,197  looms  yearly,  or  near  four  pounds  each  per 
week.  In  England  three  times  as  many  spindles  and  factories 
are  moved  by  steam  as  by  water.  Edin.  Rev.  page  472  ( 1835.) 
In  the  United  States  not  one  in  a  hundred  factories  is  moved  by 
steam.  The  power  to  move  all  the  cotton  mills  in  England, 
equals  that  of  44,000  horses,  of  which  only  11,000  is  by  the 
water  wheel.  Baines,  395.  l'\  1824,  the  whole  power  was  es- 
timated at  only  10,572  horses.  Sup.  to  Encyclop.  Brit.  "Cot- 
ton." Each  factory  of  common  size  and  employment  requires 
from  60  to  80  horse  power  here,  or  about  Hi  horse  power  to 
1,000  spindles. 

[6.]  For  the  number  of  spindles  in  England,  in  1789,  see 
Smithers'  History  of  Liverpool,  page  124.  For  1812,  Edin- 
burgh Encyclop.  article  "  Cotton;"  for  1817,  Endinburgh  Rev. 
(1827;)  for  the  rest,  1811  and  in  1824,  Sup.  to  Encyclop.  Brit. 
'' Cotton  ;"  and  the  others,  Baines's  Hist.  368,  and  McCulloch, 
441,  &c.  The  above  numbers  include  Scotland.  The  first 
cotton  mill  built  in  Ireland  was  in  1780.  London  Encyclop. 
article  "  Cotton,"  and  Sup.  to  Cyclop.  Britan.  "  Cotton."  In 
1824,  Ireland  had  145,000  spindles.  Sup,  to  Encyclop.  Britan. 
''  Cotton." 

[7.]  For  1812,  in  France,  see  Qu.  Rev.  page  397,  ( 1824-'5) 
and  French  Industry,  by  Chaptal,  page  15,  who  says  they  then 
spun  only  about  30  millions  of  pounds ;  this  was  a  large  number 
for  the  cotton  spun,  as  the  spindles  were  poor  and  imperfect. 
For  1832,  see  Nicho.  Koechlin's  evidence  before  the  Chamber 
of  Peers  ;  that  is  from  one-half  to  one  million  too  high,  as  ground- 
ed on  an  English  estimate,  which  was  too  large,  too  many  for  the 
quantity  of  cotton  spun  ;  for  1818,  from  2  Chaptal,  page  145, 
who  makes  220  factories.  Very  little  spinning  by  machinery,  in 
France,  till  after  1785.  Quarterly  .Review,  394,  (1824-'5.) 
First  in  1787,  (Sup.  to  Cyclop.  Brit:  "Cotton,")  though  cot- 
ton had  been  spun  on  wheels  since  1767.  See  2  ChaptaPs  In- 
dustry of  France,  page  4.  And  the  cotton  cloths  were  chiefly 
made  from  thread  or  yarn  imported  from  England;  Switzerland, 
and  the  Levant.  There  were  large,  numbers  of  cotton  pocket 
handkerchiefs  made  at  Rouen,  Montpelier,  ,:&^,.  early  as  1789. 
2  ChaptaPs  Industry  of  France,  page  4.  :""*  "J  "f 


87 

France  had,  in  1818,  70,000  looms  for  cloth,  10,500  for  spin- 
ning hosiery.  2  Chaptal  on  French  Industry,  page  150.  But  his 
estimates  on  all  these  subjects  are  considered  high.  In  1806,  her 
looms  for  cloth  in  twenty-two  departments  are  stated  at  only 
28,634.  London  Encyclop.  art.  "  Cotton,"  In  1806,  the  esti- 
mate, as  to  the  number  of  spindles,  is  from  the  London  Ency- 
clop. art.  "  Cotton  ;"  it  is  increased  a  little,  for  the  rest  of  France 
not  included  in  the  above  article,  and  is  about  one  spindle  to  25 
pounds  of  raw  cotton  spun  that  year,  which  is  a  fair  proportion, 
when  the  goods  made  are  fine,  and  the  machinery  is  not  of  the 
best  quality.  See  note  above,  and  supplement  to  Encyclop. 
Brit.  art.  "  Cotton."  Power  looms  are  not  much  used  vet  in 
France.    West.  Rev.  Ap.  '33. 

[8.]  Some  spindles  and  looms  moved  by  machinery  have  been 
introduced  into  India  ;  but  most  of  the  cotton  manufactured  there 
is  by  women  and  in  households  :  the  men  who  aid  in  w  eaving 
are  also  often  laborers  on  the  land.  Report  of  the  committee  on 
the  affairs  of  the  East  India  Com.  App.  310,  1832.  Wade  on 
Midd.  Classes,  page  576.  Yarn  is  often  imported  from  England, 
it  is  there  spun  so  much  cheaper  by  machinery.  Smithers,  127. 
So  in  Saxony,  Russia,  &c.  Suppleipent  to  Cycloped.  Brit. 
"  Cotton."  In  China,  it  is  said,  cotton  mills  with  spindles,  &c. 
have  been  forbidden.  In  Egypt  they  have  been  introduced,  but 
do  not  succeed  well  from  the  dryness  of  the  air,  its  impurities 
by  fine  sand,  and  want  of  skill  ;  (Hodgden,)  but  they  are  still 
used  by  the  Government.  In  Spain,  in  1802,  were  3,705  work- 
shops for  cotton  or  small  manufactories,  and  1,494  looms. 
1  Diet,  of  Com.  65.  3  do.  198,  larger.  In  Switzerland,  the  first 
mill  with  machinery,  was  built  in  1798  ;  London  Encyclop.  art. 
"  Cotton,"  where  is  some  notice  of  a  few  spindles  in  other  parts 
of  Europe,  viz  :  Saxony,  Russia,  Prussia,  &c.  So  in  Sup.  to  En- 
cyclop. Brit.  "  Cotton."  And  in  West.  Rev.  for  Ap.  1833.  The 
number  in  the  table  is  from  Sup.  to  Encyclop.  Brit.  "  Cotton." 

[9.]  The  number  o^" spindles  in  the  United  States  can  be  com- 
puted from  the  data  before  given.  For  those  before  1835,  see 
Pitk.  Stat.  526,  and  McCulloch,'page  448,  and  Reuss.  Am.  Tr. 
270.  Those  for  1809  and  1810,  the  last  too  high  in  his  table- 
see  Gallatin's>Peporf  for  the  number  in  1807  and  1811.  Those 
at  some  other  dates  are  frpni  manuscript.  Gales  and  Seaton's 
Documents,  2  Finance,  page  432.  Those  for  1814,  are  from 
Cox's  tables.  Ditto,  page  694,  and  Seybert  Statistics,  page  7, 
and  were  returned  between  1810  and  1814,    For  1820  and  1822, 


88 

Niles's  Register,  page  35,  March  1823.  Those  for  1835,  are  es- 
timated by  me  on  former  data.  In  1810,  Cox  in  his  tables  re- 
turns 269  mills,  but  too  many,  if  over  one-eighth  of  them  Were  for 
cotton.  Very  few  spindles  were  in  each  of  those  built  before 
1807  and  '8.  The  spindles  in  1830,  are  from  the  manufacturers' 
convention,  and  only  12  States,  but  included  most  of  the  manu- 
factories. Those  had  33,506  looms,  to  about  Ik  million  of  spin- 
dles, or  near  1  to  40.  At  Low^ell,  129,828  spindles  exist  to 
4,197  looms,  or  1  to  32.  This  is  near  one-thirteenth  of  all  the 
spindles  in  the  United  States.  Lowell  Statistics,  1836.  The 
first  mill  built  there  was  in  1822,  and  in  1826  only  2,500  spin- 
dles. See  Boot's  letter  to  Carey.  About  78,000  spindles  a 
year  should  be  added  here  to  make  cotton  cloth  sufficient  to  meet 
the  demand  of  the  present  annual  addition  to  our  population. 
The  spindles  have  increased  somewhat  faster  than  that  ratio  the 
last  five  years,  and  have  increased  beyond  the  exports  of  cotton 
goods.  Of  the  number  of  spindles  here  at  different  periods  in 
factories,  those  in  1790  or  1791  were  in  one  mill  at  Providence, 
erected  by  Slater  and  Brown  ;  those  in  1805  were  mostly,  if  not 
all,  in  Rhode  Island,  and  two  in  Massachusetts,  and  only  eight  or 
ten  mills.  One  was  begun  at  New  Ipswich  in  New  Hampshire, 
as  early  as  1803,  it  is  believed,  and  one  or  two  in  Massachusetts, 
and  one  in  Connecticut  before  1808,  one  near  Philadelphia  before 
1798,  making  in  all,  at  that  time,  15  mills.  Of  the  spindles  in 
1815,  about  118,000  were  in  the  same  State.  Gallatin's  Rep. 
1810  ;  New  Hampshire  Gazetteer,  article  "  New  Ipswich."  The 
Waltham  factory  in  Massachusetts  was  not  erected  till  1810  or 
1814,  and  has  since  devoted  much  capital  to  making  machinery. 
There  was  a  great  increase  in  1806  and  '7;  again  during  the 
war  of  1812  ;  again  from  1820  to  1825  ;  and  in  1831  and  '2.  If 
prices  continue  high  as  the  past  year,  and  the  raw  material  falls, 
oris  stationary,  the  new  markets  in  Asia,  and  increased  demands 
in  Europe  and  America,  by  increased  use  of  cotton,  and  increased 
population,  will  enlarge  the  number  of  factories  here ;  but  it  is 
very  easy,  with  our  extensive  water  poWer,  and  cotton  lands,  to 
overstock  the  market. 

It  seems  that  two  machines  for  spinning  and  carding  were,  with 
much  difficulty,  obtained  in  this  country,  at  Philadelphia,  early 
as  1788.  One  carded  40  pounds  of  cotton  a  day,  and  the  other 
had  50  spindles ;  and  the  growth  of  cotton  was  urged  on  the 
Southern  States,  and  the  use  of  these  machines  in  families 
recommended.  In  3  Carey's  Museum  see  the  description  more  at 
large.  In  5  Carey's  Museum,  (A.  D.  1790,)  it  is  said,  a  model 
of  a  cotton  mill  and  machinery,  &c.,  as  used  in  England,  had 


89 

been  obtained  at  Philadelphia,  by  the  society  for  promoting  man- 
ufactures and  useful  arts.  It  would  seem  that  T.  Cox,  Esq., 
took  an  active  part  in  urging  the  cultivation  and  manufacture  of 
cotton  on  the  country  early  as  1787.  Rees's  Encylop.,  art. 
"United  States,"  and  Gales  and  Seaton's  Doc, page  676,  vol.  2, 
of  Finance.  The  English  prohibited  the  export  of  the  cotton 
machinery,  as  well  as  the  emigration  of  their  mechanics,  under 
such  penalties  as  delayed  the  introduction  of  it  here,  and  caused 
the  price  of  machinery  for  many  years  to  be  so  high  here  as  to 
retard,  and  almost  defeat  successful  competition.    See  before. 

[10.]  For  a  detailed  account  of  the  different  kinds  of  machinery 
used  in  the  cotton  manufactories,  the  inventors  of  them,  improve- 
ments in  them,  &c.,  see  London  Encyclop.,  art.  "  Cotton,"  and 
same  article  in  the  New  Edinb.  Encyclop.  and  supplement  to 
Encyclop.  Brit.  "Cotton." 

[11.]  The  change  of  late  years  in  some  places  in  England, 
from  the  hand  to  the  power  loom,  has  caused  some  distress,  and 
the  employment  of  a  larger  portion  of  females  and  children;  now 
about  one-fifth  there  are  men,  one-third  women,  and  the  rest 
children.  Wade's  Hist,  of  the  Middling  Classes,  pages  570  and 
571 .  The  number  of  hand  looms  in  England,  in  1 820  and  1830, 
was  about  the  same,  viz.,  240,000;  but  that  of  power  looms  had 
increased  from  14,000  to  55,000.  Each  of  the  latter  performs  as 
much  as  three  of  the  former.  Wade,  261 .  Parliamentary  papers, 
in  1830.  In  1834  the  power  looms  had  become  100,000.  Baines, 
237. 

[12.]  The  American  throstle  spindle  revolved  7,500  times 
before  1833,  though  it  used  to  run  in  England  only  4,500,  and 
afterwards  only  5,400.  West.  Rev.  for  April,  1833,  page  403. 
Machinery  and  skill,  and  the  raw  material,  have  ^o  improved, 
that  where  some  years  ago  the  threads  broke  at  the  rate  of  13 
per  cent.,  they  break  now  only  3  per  cent.  Do.  Many  modern 
improvements  in  machinery  in  England  are  from  America.  West. 
Rev.,  Ap.  1833. 


12 


90 


PL4 
O 

H 
O 
< 
Em 

;:? 
iz; 

I 

o 

H 
H 
O 

o 


i 

o 

P 

1 

i 

3 

CO 

i 

CO 

eS 

C 

1 

'o 

P 

t .              « 

1 

Q 

1 

c 

a. 
en 

1 

1                                 l»o 

>» 

i 

C 

;§                                                                                  »     1 

1 

£ 

Q 

1                                                 '   ' 

s 

lib 

c 

1 

n 

fi3 

•J 

5a«aA 

OOt-H(2QGOTiHVOCOI^a0050i^©5GO 
COO>Oi05C5a505030505050000 

91 


1-1- i2 


00 


I    I    I 


I   1    I 


I    i    I 


(    I    i 


-^  CO 


I    i    I 


i-HX«OQ0^G5OC0C0 


n3«JiftCOr}<COOi005t*©5S<J«OCO 

ei 

rtCOCOr-ODCOl'COOOl^CO^ 
00000005COOT-i©v7COTfGO 


^  GO  *- 
i>  CO  QO 


Oi  t^  Oi 
t-<  xo  ^ 


•<5t<»OCOt^C0050'-'<NGO 

aoQOcoaoQOcoSSSao 

aOQOCOCOQOCOQOQOOOCOOOGOQOCOQO 

92 


a 
o 


O 
CO 

W 
PS 

O 
<J 

12; 

;^ 
I 

:?; 
o 

H 
O 

o 


0 

1                         ^:z^ 
1                         g^ 

en 

p 

ii 

1 

Q 

;2                            I         J        1         1         I        1                       ^ 

1 

c 
0 

Turkey  and 
Africa. 

2 

'0 
P 

.2                1     1     1     1     I     I              0 

1 

t 

'c 
P 

1                1     1     1     1     I     1             ^ 

5                                                    ' — ' 

=5 

1:4 

1 

P 

1               {     1     1     1     I     J            57 

t 

1 

.2               Tt^OOOrHO              "ir 

;-                               ^   ^   rH   1-1   ,-1                    ;3j 

J 

'0 
p 

Ji  -5  ^        t-  QO  00  05  S^>                       r-1 
^^       05  00  0  0  ©^                       S<1 

•sa 

B3A 

©-■>  GO  GO  GO  CO  CO          GO  , , 

oooooooocooo       ao  — 

93 

[1.]  The  exports  of  English  manufactures  in  1833  and  '4,  were 
about  one-third  in  value  in  yarn.  See  Edinburgh  Review,  427, 
(1835)  Baines's  and  Official  Reports.  See  table  K,  note  on  cap- 
ital.    Some  years  yarn  constitutes  one-half  in  weight. 

From  1814  to  1823  inclusive,  the  viilue  of  yarn  expor^d  com- 
pared with  the  value  of  other  cotton  goods,  increased  slowjy, 
from  being  about  one-seventh  and  one-sixth,  to  be  about  one- 
fifth.  London  Encyclopedia,  article  "  Cotton."  The  propor- 
tional increase  of  yarn  has  been  even  greater  since.  See  Par- 
ker's speech  in  Parliament,  February,  1836.  The  yarn  export- 
ed is  understood  to  be  generally  coarse;  between  Nos.  18  and 
40.  From  half  to  three-quarters  of  the  lace  made  is  exported 
chiefly  to  the  continent.  It  is  mostly  made  of  Sea-island  cotton, 
and  equals  near  9  millions  of  dollars  in  value  yearly.  McCul- 
loch,  page  744. 

[2.]  The  difference  between  the  official  value  on  exportation, 
and  the  declared  value,  is  given  above.  But  the  declared,  or 
what  is  sometimes  called  the  real  value,  in  the  2d  column,  is  still 
usually  from  2^^  to  5  per  cent,  under  the  actual  market  value. 
( Baines,  page  403. )  The  official  value  is  founded  on  the  quantity, 
computing  the  price  as  it  was  about  the  close  of  the  17th  cen- 
tury, or  A.  D.  1689.  The  market  value  has  changed  more  from 
the  official  in  some  articles  than  in  others,  e.  g. 

In  1829,  calicoes,  plain,  per  yard,    -         -       1 

u  tc  (t  It         tc  _  -  0 

"  ^  calicoes,  printed,  per  yard,  -         -       1 

C(    *  tc  u  tc         ti  _  »         0 

"    cotton  yarn  and  twist,  per  cwt.    £10  0 

(Baines,  page  351.)   See  more  on  prices  of  manufactures,  table 
K,  note  1. 

The  sum  entered  for  1835,  is  only  for  the  year  ending  5th  Jan- 
uary, 1835,  and  not  any  subsequent;  and  the  second  sum  for 
1834,  is  for  the  year  1834  only  to  5th  January,  while  the  first 
sum  for  1834,  is  probably  for  the  whole  fiscal  year.  Some  dis- 
crepancies occasionally  arise  by  the  statements  being  made  with 
different  terminations  for  the  year,  as  some  end  in  April,  and 
some  in  January,  &c.     See  returns. 

[3.]  The  exports  of  cotton  manufactures  from  England  are  now, 
and  for  some  years  have  been,  nearly  equal  to  one -half  of  her 
exports  of  every  kind.  The  above  sums  for  England  are  from 
Baines,  page  350.     The  records  for   1813  and  before  that,  for 


Sd 

.  official. 

6 

real. 

6 

official. 

8t 

real. 

0 

official. 

0 

real. 

94 

the  declared  value  were  burned.  Those  sums  do  not  include 
Ireland,  amounting  from  one-tenth  to  three-tenths  of  a  million 
yearly.  Aikin  says  63  per  cent,  of  what  is  made  in  England  is 
exported,  and  Edinburgh  Review,  page  472,  says,  in  1833,  that 
the  exports  from  England  were  about  18i  million  pounds  ster- 
ling, and  consumption  about  twelve  and  one-tenth  million  ster- 
ling.    See  for  1831,  '2  and  '3,  McCulloch,  675. 

[4.]  The  exports  from  France  in  1823  and  '4,  are  from  2  Dic- 
tionary of  Spanish  Commerce,  page  148.  In  1829,  from  Edin- 
burgh Review,  page  62,  (1829.)  In  1833,  from  Baines  525, 
note,  and  in  1831  and  '2,  from  the  French  tables  of  commerce, 
with  a  slight  addition  or  variation,  it  is  believed,  in  some  cases, 
in  the  value  of  the  franc.  In  1830  from  Westminster  Review, 
April,  1833,  and  Wade  on  working  classes,  575,  and  that  7  mil- 
lions were  printed  goods. 

[5.]  Those  from  Spain  in  1803,  were  chiefly  from  her  pos- 
sessions in  India  and  America.  Dictionary  of  Spanish  Com- 
merce. Spain  of  late  imports  largely  of  cotton  manufactures. 
See  table  O,  note  1,  and  table  N.  The  Moors  introduced  this 
manufacture  into  Spain,  early  as  the  9th  or  10th  centuries. 
Baines,  page  38. 

[6.]  Those  from  India  are  estimates,  and  might  be  extended, 
from  the  following  data.  Her  islands  and  she  have  long  had  a 
domestic  trade  in  cotton  goods.  3  Crawford's  Hist,  of  Ind. 
Archip.  350.  It  then  spread  to  other  parts  of  Asia,  to  the  east- 
ern coast  of  Africa,  and  next  to  Europe. 

India  in  1813,  exported  to  England  alone  10  millions  of  dollars 
worth  of  her  cotton  goods,  and  now  imports  as  much  from  Eng- 
land. Montgomery's  Anglo.  East.  Emp.  But  she  still  exports 
certain  kinds  to  England  valued  in  1831,  at  about  2  millions  of 
dollars  ;  in  1832,  at  li  millions  ;  and  in  1833,  at  1  million.  Some 
of  these  are  re-exported.  McCulloch,  page  672  and  676;  Evid. 
on  East  Ind.  Comp.,  page  310,  App.  In  1802,  '3,  and  '4,  the 
United  States  imported  cotton  goods  of  India  origin,  worth  near- 
ly 3  million  dollars  per  year.  Seyb.  page  218.  Hence  the  ex- 
ports of  cotton  manufactures  from  India  formerly  were  large. 
But  they  have  fallen  off  greatly,  and  especially  since  1816,  to 
the  United  States.  Pitk.  Stat.  188  and  '9.  She  often  exports  raw 
cotton  of  late  years,  instead  of  cotton  manufactures.  Supple- 
ment to  Encyclop.  Brit.  "  Cotton."     See  Seyb.   Stat,  page  289, 


95 

on  our  whole  imports  thence  in  1814,  and  chiefly  cottons.     See 
above. 

[7.]  Those  exports  from  the  United  States  are  from  official 
tables.  They  doubtless  would  have  increased  much  more  rapid- 
ly, had  the  demand  for  them  at  home  not  been  so  great,  by  means 
of  their  good  quality,  cheapness,  and  our  increasing  population. 

[8.]  The  whole  exports  of  cotton  goods  from  China  to  Eng- 
land and  her  dependencies  in  1832,  were  valued  at  about  i  mil- 
lion of  dollars.  McCuUoch,  237,  article  "  Cotton,"  and  page 
240,  where  is  given  the  pieces  of  nankeens  so  exported  from 
1793  to  1831,  which  alone  at  50  cents  each,  would  range  from 
^Jth  to  1  million  of  dollars  yearly.  In  page  813,  he  thinks  the 
exports  of  nankeens  have  been  on  the  increase  to  different  quar- 
ters. 

From  China  the  exports  of  cotton  goods  consist  chiefly  of 
chintses  and  nankeen,  and  the  amount  in  the  table  are  estimates. 
The  former  have  greatly  diminished  of  late  years.  Supplement 
to  Encyclop.  Brit.  "  Cotton,"  She  imports  now  both  English 
and  American  cotton  goods.  ( See  exports  of  them,  tables  N 
andO.) 

In  1802,  '3,  and  '4,  the  United  States  alone,  it  is  estimated,  im- 
ported Chinese  cotton  goods  valued  from  1  million  of  dollars  to 
1^  million  yearly.  See  official  returns  of  all  articles  imported 
from  China,  Gales  &  Seaton's  Doc,  page  599  in  1  vol.  on  Com. 
and  Nav.  Formerly  the  United  States  imported  largely  of  nan- 
keens, so  as  some  years  to  export  ^^^  million  of  dollars  of  them 
as  in  A.  D.  1792,  Gales  Sc  Seaton's  Doc,  page  144,  vol.  1,  Com. 
and  Nav.  But  our  official  returns  since,  as  well  as  before  1821, 
do  not  discriminate  the  cotton  goods  imported.  From  1818  to 
1827,  they  fell  off'  from  about  1  million  to  ^  million.  Pitk.  Stat. 
305,  McCuUoch,  page  242. 

[9.]  The  exports  of  cotton  goods  from  Germany  are  chiefly 
by  land  and  not  extensive.  This  trade  could  not  have  existed  at 
at  all  formerly,  and  the  estimates  are  too  uncertain  for  much  re- 
liance. 

In  and  near  Vienna  are  established  considerable  cotton  man- 
ufactures by  machinery.  Supplement  to  Ency.  Brit.  "  Cotton." 
According  to  McCuUoch  Diet.,  page  448,  the  cotton  exports 
from  Austria  are  chiefly  in  yarn.  They  are  on  the  increase.  See 
Wade  on  Working  Classes,  page  576. 


96 

[10.]  From  Turkey,  including  the  products  of  Smyrna  and 
the  neighborhood,  as  well  as  Barbary  and  Morocco,  there  have 
been  frequently  exported  in  former  years,  various  articles  of  cot- 
ton manufacture  ;  but  not  of  great  value  as  a  whole.  This  man- 
ufacture was  introduced  into  Turkey  in  Europe,  in  the  14th  cen- 
tury, by  the  Turks.  Some  cotton  cloth  was  imported  from  the 
coast  of  Africa  to  England  about  the  close  of  the  16th  century. 
The  growth  and  manufacture  of  cotton  were  diffused  much  by 
the  Mahometan  conquests.  2  McPherson's  Com.  193  ;  Baines32. 

[11.]  The  barrenness  of  this  table  is  another  illustration  of 
the  small  extent  in  the  foreign  trade  of  cotton  goods  except  by 
England,  France,  and  the  United  States.  It  presents  also  a  sin- 
gular illustration  of  the  recent  date  of  their  progress  in  it,  and  of 
the  difficulty  in  knowing  much  of  the  ancient  or  later  business 
of  India  and  China  in  this  branch  of  their  trade,  with  such  accu- 
racy as  to  deserve  reliance ;  though  more  leisure  might  proba- 
bly have  enabled  me  to  present  some  more  statistical  facts  on 
that  subject,  than  I  have  yet  met  with.  See  the  diffusion  of  this 
manufacture  by  the  Mahometans  from  Arabia,  &c.  note  (10)  in 
this  table,  and  (.5.) 

In  1825  the  Dutch  exports  and  imports  at  Japan  are  given 
(McCulloch,page  812,)  and  the  former  as  well  as  the  latter  con- 
tained a  few  cotton  goods,  from  5,000  to  8,000  in  value. 


97 


o 

W 

O 
< 


o 

H 
H 
O 

o 


•[izBaa  o;  i)UBiJSua 

1 

s 

o;  saoBid  snou«A 

t 

o 

•umds 
0?  sao^id  siioKiBA 

CO 

C 
O 

1 

•1 

•[izBjg  ;daox3  *ooi 
mnog  oj  pu^jSug 

1 

C 

1 

Bipui  o)  puBiSug 

1 

en 

c 
.2 

2 

1 

•spuBi 

i 
1- 

tn 

C 

o 

i 

•S 

•XuBui 
-jao  o)  puqSug 

1 

i 

.2 

•ZJ 

H 

H 

33at!jj  o;  pu^iSua 

^ 

Q 

c 
.2       J=     • 

•saws 
psjiufx  oi  pu«iSua 

2 
P 

s 

o 

;—       1          1          t         1 

1 

•8 

w»A 

0PO>O5O5OiO5O3CSOJO> 

IS 


98 


S3 

a 
o 
O 


o 

H 
O 
<i 

o 

H 

O 

o 


oj  pu«i3ua 

1 
1 

3 

S 

•Bissna  o; 
S30«[d    snouBA 

1 

Q 

Millions. 

•uiBdg  o; 
S30«[d    snouBA 

Millions. 

20 

IizBjg^daoxaooi 
•g  o^  pu«[3ua 

1 

'3 

P 

Millions. 

•Buiqo  pUB  Blp 
-ui  'oj  puBiSug 

1 

Millions. 

'spu«iJaq»9M 
o)  puBiSug 

2 

Millions. 

•XUBIU 

-jao  oi  puBiSug 

1 

o 
Q 

Millions. 

•fiOUBJJ 

0)    pu«[Sua 

Millions. 

itoi 

•sa^is^spai 
■luxi  0^  puB[Sua 

2 

J! 
-3 
Q 

Hilliona. 

Real 

Offi.    or  dec. 

17     21 

17     21 

11     14 

'S. 

W9A 

i>,  GOQOOOQOGOCOCOCOOdQOQOOOCOCO 

99 


GO  CO  CO  J> 


CD 


CO  CO  CO 


I 

1                                                III 

iO 

1—1 
co^ 

1 

^  ^  1>  GO  ' — 'CO  CO 

00 

<N  GO  <3^ 

-«* 

XOvOCOiO^»OC5     '       '       '05QOCO 

r— 1 

VO 

i0^j>cor-cococococococoa5 

o 

1-N 

©5 

t       •       1       1       1       1 

o 

XO5'«1<G0iO'^-?J<G0Tj<Tji^iOTji 

05 

<       1       1       •       •       1 

ccT  CO*"  ©cT  xo"  t^  oT  Gvf  o"  e<r  cT  cT  ocT  o^ 

1-1  r-i  -^  r-<          SQ  CO  -^ 

GO 

S 

1       1  '   1       1       1       1 

i;COQ0r-l>^COC0GOCOCOG0Q0COQ0a0 

i— 1 

Tt  iO  CO  l^  cc  O^ 
CO  00  CO  CO  QO  QO 

CO 

^©5GO'^10C01>COC50^©?GO 
©Q  (M  ©Cl  &-1  ©^  ©^  (M  ©>!  ©Q  GO  GO  GO  GO 
QOCOGOCOaOOOCOGOCOCOCOGOCO 

GO  GO 
GO  CO 
1—^  t—l 

f— 1 

(—1 

1—4 

iOO 

[1.]  This  table  shows  chiefly  the  exports  of  cotton  goods  from 
England  to  different  places,  and  from  1820  to  1833  the  values 
are  mostly  taken  from  ofl&cial  documents.  Porter's  tables,  161- 
7,  page  300.  The  statements  in  different  books  sometimes  dif- 
fer from  referring  to  different  terminations  of  the  year. 

[2.]  Since  1832  Belgium  has  taken,  in  that  year  and  1833, 
about  1^-  millions  of  the  amount  of  what  is  placed  to  the  whole 
Netherlands  from  England.  In  1834,  it  is  said  by  Alexander, 
she  imported  of  cotton  goods,  from  all  places,  about  2\  millions 
of  dollars,  and  smuggled  twice  as  much  more,  that  did  not  appear 
on  the  official  returns. 

[3.]  The  exact  consumption  of  manufactured  cotton  goods  in 
each  country  is  seldom  attainable.  But  an  approximation  to  the 
quantity,  or  value,  can  be  easily  made  from  the  data  given  in  the 
tables.  Thus  the  quantity  of  cotton  manufactured  in  each,  and 
not  exported,  will,  with  the  imports  of  cotton  manufactures  not 
afterwards  re-exported,  constitute  nearly  the  true  amount. 

Another  general  mode  of  computation  might  be,  that  in  such 
countries  as  Turkey,  it  has  been  estimated  that  only  two  pounds 
of  raw  cotton  per  head,  made  into  manufactures,  is  consumed. 
(Urquhart's  Views,  page  150.)  In  warmer,  and  still  poorer 
countries,  it  would  be  less.  In  France,  each  person  is  estimated 
to  consume  $4  worth  of  cotton  goods  per  year  ;  in  England,  ^5  ; 
and  here,  probably  ^6. 

The  exports  to  Germany  and  Netherlands  are  from  one-third 
to  one-half  in  twist  and  yarn,  and  are  woven  there.  Porter's 
tables,  page  300,  and  Baines  416.  So  in  a  great  proportion  to 
Russia.  Sup.  to  Enclyp.  Brit.  "Cotton;"  and  some  even  to 
India.  See  table  O.  So  chiefly  to  Prussia.  Blackwood's  Mag- 
azine, for  January,  1836. 

[4.]  The  exports  to  France  from  1789  to  1793,  are  computed 
at  5  millions  of  dollars  yearly,  in  Quar.  Review,  394-9,  ( 1824-5. ) 
See  ofl&cial  returns  for  the  table,  and  McCuUoch,  page  644. 
But  it  must  include  all  smuggled,  and  is  then  not  too  high.  It 
equals  the  whole  amount  of  all  the  regular  imports  of  cotton 
goods  into  France  at  that  time  from  all  quarters.  2  Chaptal's 
Industry  of  France,  page  9.  The  sums  in  the  table  for  1789, 
&c.  are  from  Bowring's  Report,  page  52,  who  says  that  10  mil- 
lions of  dollars  worth  of  English  manufactures,  and  chiefly  cot- 
ton, are  of  late  years  smuggled  from  England   to   France.     See 


101 

also  Baines,  517,  note.  The  whole  imports  of  such  goods  into 
France,  in  1823,  were  9  millions  of  dollars;  in  1824,  12  millions 
of  dollars.  In  1806,  about  14^  millions  of  dollars  worth  were 
smuggled.  Sup.  to  Encyclop.  Brit.  "  Cotton."  See  2  Diction- 
ary of  Spanish  Commerce,  page  214.  In  1812,  all  the  legal  im- 
ports of  cotton  goods  into  France  were  less  than  a  third  of  a  mil- 
lion of  dollars.  2  Chaptal,  page  9.  Of  those  smuggled,  in  late 
years,  quite  2  millions  of  dollars  worth  were  in  bobinet  laces. 
McCulloch,  1054. 

[5.]  The  exports  to  India  include  the  islands,  and  for  1831  and 
1832  are  from  McCulloch,  page  446,  and  the  others  mostly  from 
official  tables.  See  more  in  McCulloch,  235,  as  to  that  part  by 
the  East  India  Company.  The  trade  in  cotton  manufactures  has 
increased  greatly  since  the  first  opening  of  it,  in  1814.  Do. 
533-4,  and  539,  another  table. 

[6.]  These  exports  to  Spain  were  chiefly  from  England, 
France,  and  Italy,  and  some  from  Spanish  America.  (Diction- 
ary of  Spanish  Commerce.)  Those  direct  to  Spain  from  Eng- 
land, in  1833  and  1834,  were  only  about  Vb  million  of  dollars. 
But  England  exported  to  Gibraltar,  in  those  years,  from  1  to  la- 
millions  of  dollars  in  cotton  goods,  (see  official  tables,)  and 
which  found  their  way  in  part  into  Spain.  McCulloch,  Die.  page 
600.  The  sum  for  1834  is  a  computation  only  on  the  above  data, 
and  the  fact  that  France  exports  therefrom  2  to  2l  millions  of 
dollars  yearly.     See  table  O,  note  [1.] 

[7.]  The  imports  into  Russia,  in  1832,  were  almost  wholly 
from  England.  Porter's  tables,  545;  Baines,  416.  In  1833, 
from  England,  6  millions  of  dollars;  and  in  1834,  only  5^  mil- 
lions of  dollars.  Some  of  them  go  to  places  in  the  Black  sea, 
&c.  McCulloch,  859.  Russia  excludes  certain  cotton  cloths, 
but  not  yarn.  Blackwood's  Magazine,  for  February,  1836,  page 
62.     On  others,  her  tariff  is  high.     2  Smith's  Com.  Dig. 

[8.]  Exports  to  Brazil,  &c.  See  McCulloch,  446  ;  Baines, 
416;  and  Official  Reports  for  1834  and  1835. 

[9.]  England  exports  largely  cotton  goods  also  to  Italy  and 
Italian  islands:  in  1833,  7  millions  of  dollars;  and  in  1834,10 
millions.  See  more  in  McCulloch,  page  814,  and  page  1212, 
some  to  Venice,  now  i^^  of  a  million. 


102 

The  ratio  of  this  kind  of  exports  from  England,  in  1834,  was 
as  follows:  1.  Germany;  2.  Italy;  3  United  States;  4.  India 
and  China;  5.  Holland;  6.  Brazil;  7.  Russia;  8.  Turkey  and 
Greece,  in  1833  and  1834,  over  4  millions  of  dollars  each  year; 
9.  Portugal  and  islands,  in  some  years  3  to  4^-  millions  of  dol- 
lars; 10.  British  West  Indies,  ditto,  3  to  3f  millions  of  dollars  ; 
11.  Chili  alone  li  to  3  millions  of  dollars;  12.  States  of  Rio 
de  la  Plata  alone  li  to  2i  millions  of  dollars.  See  official  re- 
turns, and  Baines,  416.  Those  for  Germany  go  largely  to 
Trieste.     McCulloch,  1186. 

The  whole  exports  to  Germany  in  1833,  were  estimated  to  be 
so  divided  that  from  10  to  11  millions  of  dollars  were  in  cloths 
and  laces,  and  the  remainder  in  yarn,  being  35  millions  of 
pounds.  Beside  Trieste,  part  of  these  exports  pass  through  the 
Hanse  towns,  and  others  through  Rotterdam  and  Antwerp. 
Blackwood's  Magazine,  for  January,  1836. 

[10.]  Those  exports  to  the  United  States  are  obtained  chiefly 
from  our  own  official  returns  of  imports,  though  some,  and  es- 
pecially the  earliest,  are  from  English  tables. 


103 


2 

' 

•saipui  ;83AV  am 

o)  B3i«)s  pav.un 

. 

•BUiqo 

1 

• 

o)  s3jb;s  pailun 

(S 

Cm 

O 
at 

V 

fl 

^ 

o 

1 

•80IJJV  pu«  «>PUI 

1 

:       ' 

O) 

o 

oj  S3)«}s  paiiun 

"o 

w 

42 

fi 

p:; 

&. 

D 

1 

H 

o 

o 

, 

<1 

T 

•oDixaw  puB 

2 

i 

6  g 

g 

T?oiJ9ui  V  mnos 

s 

o 
.5: 

o^ssjBis  P9l!«n 

0 

is 

^ 

0) 

1 

1 

•ssms  ps^iun 

i 

i 

Z 

g 

3in  OJ   XUBU1490 

"o 

s 

o 

g* 

Q 

i^ 

w 

1 

« 

O 

•saiuopo 

§ 

o 

jaij  o;  aouBJ^q; 

1 

■l 

•pUBlSua  o; 

1 

s 

90UBJJ 

o 
Q 

i 

a5 

w 

^ 

'B3;bis  psvun 

5 

2   -'° 

aq)  o;  soubjj: 

"o 

3     '" 

■ 

^ 

S 

. 

t-  05 

O»-*©5«0T*<iftC0t»Q0C3 

•8a«3A 

a0COCiC5O5O5O5O5O5O5O5O5 

. 

l-i-l:-l-i>t*t*t-t*t-t*l> 

104 


o 
O 


o 

cc; 

D 

o 
< 

I 

o 

H 
H 
O 
O 


•BUiqo 


•«oijjv  pU8  «!pui 
o)  saws  pa^iun 


•oojxaiv  P"« 


•ssms  P3ll«n 


•puTS|3ua  o; 


•saws  p3V«n 
am  0^  aouBJj 


•M«»A 


s 


oooooooooo*^^:- 

QOQOXaOCOQOQOQOOOCOCOCOQO 


105 


^oooooogoo 

S  C)  Cj  (^  <^  ^^  ^^  ^>  c^  cz^ 

f       1 

^  cTcD^co^art^i-rGo'ccrj'^ 

GO 

OCJCOTJH'.^'^TJ^IOGO©:) 

"■ 

1 

pOOOOOOOOO 
5000000000 

5  0^0^05^ 0^0^ 0^0^ 0^0 

JSi^Oi^tOZOOiCOiOG^ 

0—.          T-HS^^iO^QOfHiO 

5                     ^^ 

jiOOOOOOOOO 

5000000000 

55  O^O^O^O^O^GJ^O^O^CD^ 

Orti— ieCJCOi>COGO<3<iCO 


OQ 


h'°  h°  h'°  Az  H°  HinH°  H(s  -*!'=  r-in^^z  H,c»  H<»  t^i: 


GO 


O         -N 


iiiiiiiiiiii;:;^'^     '—J 


I    I    I    I    I    I    I    I    I    i  i^H-  I    I 


(^  ^r-  H.-  HnHta  H|t<  ,^0  Hits  H|t»  CTJm  -ie<  H(«t  (vjVt 


h: 


G0T+iOOl>CDC5O'-^©^G0'^>Jf:)<:0i:^C0C5OT--i(^7G0-«*i0 
^^^^^,-N,-M©5e^©>>.  ©>'»«^'{©5'SQGQS<>e<)GOGOGOGOGOGO 

aoQDaoooaocDaoGOcoGOcoQOQOcoaoaoaOGOGoaoQOGOQO 

r— 1 

14 


106 

[1.]  Over  half  of  the  exports  of  France,  in  her  cotton  manu- 
factures, are  to  her  own  colonies,  according  to  Baines,  525,  note  ; 
but  this  is  too  much  for  1831  and  '2.  France  exports,  also,  about 
^1,000,000  of  them  per  year  to  Holland  and  Belgium,  one-half 
million  to  Germany,  two  and  a  half  million  to  Spain,  and  one 
million  to  Sardinia.  See  Tables  of  French  Commerce,  for  1832. 
In  1831,  the  export  was  short  of  a  million  to  Holland  and  Bel- 
gium, Sardinia  and  Germany,  each,  about  two  millions  to  Spain, 
over  1 1^6  to  Mexico,  and  only  about  one  million  to  her  own  colo- 
nies, with  one-fourth  of  a  million  to  Hayti.  Her  exports  to  Eng- 
land given  in  the  table,  are  from  her  official  tables  for  1831  and 
1832.     Besides  that  some  is  smuggled. 

[2.]  Those  exports  from  the  United  States  are  compiled  from 
official  tables,  as  far  as  they  go  back,  discriminating  to  what 
country.  Those  to  the  United  States,  from  France  and  Germany, 
are  from  our  own  official  returns. 

[3.]  Tariff  or  duty  on  cotton  manufactures. — The  exports  of 
cotton  manufactures  to  any  particular  country,  are  often  influ- 
enced by  the  rate  of  duty  imposed  on  their  importation.  A  de- 
tail of  the  several  tariff's  of  all  those  countries,  in  respect  to  cotton 
goods,  would  be  tedious,  and  might  be  supposed  to  bear  on  the 
question  of  protection,  &c.,  in  the  United  States,  and  which 
question,  it  is  not  proposed  in  these  tables  or  notes,  to  agitate. 

It  may  be  added,  that  the  average  duty  imposed  in  France,  at 
this  time,  on  the  imports  of  most  cotton  goods,  is  very  high, 
amounting  almost  to  a  prohibition,  except  for  re-export.  So  in 
Russia.  Blackwood'sMagazine,for  January,  1836.  In  England, 
it  is  considered  to  be  about  20  per  cent.,  though  low  as  10  on 
some  articles.  Before  1826,  it  w^as  much  higher — 50  and  67  per 
cent.  See  1  Com.  Digest,  by  Smith,  page  98,  and  Huskisson's 
speeches,  in  1825,  in  Parliamentary  Debates.  McCulloch,  page 
1117.  In  the  United  States,  the  duty,  in  1790,  was  about  7^ 
per  cent,  on  the  value  of  most  cotton  goods:  in  1794,  raised  to 
12i  per  cent.;  in  1816, to  25  percent,  and  a  minimum;  in  1824, 
the  same,  with  a  certain  minimuyn  valuation,  making  the  duty 
larger;  in  1828,  increased  still  more  by  raising  the  minimum;  in 
1332,  reduced  again.  See  the  diff"erent  acts  of  Conscress  on,  the 
tariff*,  and  Pitk.  Stat.,  page  188. 

This  makes  the  average  duty  in  1833,  on  most  cotton  cloths, 
and  as  computed  by  some,  about  42  per  cent.,  and  thus  exposes 
it  to  a  biennial  reduction  till  1842,  when,  by  the  existing  laws,  it 
will  become  only  20  per  cent.     Campbell  on  Tariff",  page   120, 


107 

The  duty  on  British  cotton  manufactures  has  lately  been  increased 
in  Java,  by  the  Dutch,  from  6  per  cent,  to  25  per  cent.  Black- 
wood's Magazine,  January,  1836,  page  51. 

[4.]  More  could  be  given  on  the  exports  of  cotton  manufac- 
tures from  a  few  of  the  above  countries  at  other  periods,  but  the 
amount  and  value  of  them  were  so  small  as  to  deserve  very  little 
notice,  and  the  increases  of  late  years,  compared  with  their 
meager  and  blank  condition,  in  this  respect,  a  quarter  and  a  third 
of  a  century  ago,  are  striking  indications  of  the  revolution  going 
on  in  Europe  and  the  United  States  in  the  nianufacture  of  cotton, 


108 


P. 

COTTON. 

Dates  of  the  most  important  changes  in  the  cultivation^  manu- 
facture^ and  trade  of  cotton^  chiefly  within  the  period  to  which 
these  tables  generally  extend. 


1735 

[2] 

1738 

[6] 


1742 

1750 

1756 
[3] 

[4] 
1761 

1763 
1767 

1768 

1772 

1T74 

[7] 

1779 

1781 
[5] 


1782 

1783 

1785 


1786 

1787 

1789 


First  cotton  yarn  spun  in  England  by  machinery,  by  Mr.  Wyatt.     Smithers, 

153. 
Cotton  first  grown  in  Surinam  by  the  Dutch,  or  perhaps  first  exported  thence. 

A  patent  first  taken  out  by  Lewis  Paul  for  an  improved  method  in  carding, 
and  the  fly  shuttle  invented  by  John  Kay.  Stock  cards  were  first  used  for 
cotton  by  J.  Hargrave  in  1760,  and  cylinder  cards  were  not  invented  till 
1762,  and  were  first  used  by  Robert  Peel.  Carding  not  brought  to  perfec- 
tion till  1775.     Baines,  170. 

First  mill  for  spinning  cotton  built  at  Birmingham  j  moved  by  mules  or  horses , 
but  not  successful. 

The  fly  shuttle  was  brought  into  general  use  in  England  in  weaving,  though 
some  postpone  the  date  to  1760.     Baines,  116. 

Cotton  velvets  and  quiltings  first  made  in  England. 

Arkwright  obtained  his  first  patent  for  the  spinning  frame,  though  he  made 
further  improvements  in  1768.  Became  free  1784.  Baines  says  his  first 
patent  was  in  1769.  So  does  Wade,  and  that  his  second  patent  was  m  1771. 
Two  years  after,  Thomas  Highs  claims  to  have  invented  the  spinning  jenny, 
which  J.  Hargrave  claims  also  in  1767.  Smithers  and  McCuUoch,  436. 
Edinb.  Encyclop.  art.  "  Cotton;"  or,  according  to  Baines,  in  1764. 

The  stocking  frame  applied  to  make  lace  by  Hammond. 

The  feeder  invented  by  Lees,  and  the  crank  and  combs  by  Hargrave. 

A  bill  passed  to  prevent  the  export  of  machinery  used  in  cotton  factories. 
Smithers,  155.  And  still  in  force,  though  not  strictly  executed.  Black- 
wood's Magazine  for  January,  1836. 

Mule  spinning  invented  by  Hargrave,  or  rather  perfected  by  Crompton. 
Baines,  page  199. 

First  imports  of  raw  cotton  into  England  from  Brazil ;  poorly  prepared ;  and 
in  three  to  nine  years  after,  first  from  United  States  of  their  own  growth ; 
and  from  India  and  Bourbon  about.  1785.  See  table  F — note,  and  Smithers, 
156.  .  .  ,\  :-■■:■-■■  ■;_ 

Watt  took  out  his  patent  for  the  steam  eftgine,  though  some  say  in  1769 
the  first  one ;  and  got  into  general  use  to  move  machinery  in  1790.  He 
began  his  improvements,  in-  1764,  according  to  Wade's  history  of  the  mid- 
dling classes,  page  82. 

A  bounty  granted  in  England  on.the'eXp<yrt'of  certain  cotton  goods.  4  Mc- 
Pherson,  42  and  56,  ^       ,:  .-    ■  '••:,. 

Power  looms  invented  bj  Doctor  Cartwright;  though  previous  to  that  some 
similar  models  had  existed  which  had  not  been  patented  or  used.  Baines, 
228.  Supplement  to  Encyclopedia  Brit..  arti<'le  "  Cotton."  Steam  en- 
gines used  in  cotton  factories."  Baines,  226,  Cylinder  printing  invent-ed 
by  Bell.  Baines,  267.  Arkwright's  patent  expired,  and  a  great  impulse  to 
manufactures  of  cotton.     4  McPherson,  79  and  81. 

Bleaching  first  performed  by  oxymuriatic  acid  by  Bertholett.     Baines,  184. 

First  machinery  to  spin  cotton  put  in  operation  in  France,  though  some  cotton 
was  used  in  spinning,  &c.  since  1767.     Encyclopedia  Brit.  407. 

Sea-island  cotton  first  planted  in  the  United  States ;  and  upland  cotton  first 
cultivated  for  use  and  export  about  this  time,  or  three  or  four  years  previous. 
Some  say  in  1786.     See  tables,  and  Baines,  297  ;  and  others  in  1790. 


109 
P. — Dales  of  most  important  changes,  ^c. — Continued. 


First  cotton  factory  built  in  the  United  States  in  Rhode  Island.  (8.]     Water 
power  first  applied  to  the  mule  spinner  by  Kelly.     Baines,  205. 


The  cotton  gin  invented  by  E.  Whitney,  in  the  United  States.    This  is  often 
stated  to  be  in  A.  D.  1795 ;  but  the  patent  is  dated  in  1794,  March  14. 


Sea-island  cotton  chiefly  substituted  for  Bourbon  cotton  in  England. 

First  mill  and  machinery  erected  in  Switzerland  for  cotton. 

Spinning  by  machinery  introduced  into  Saxony.     Encyclopedia  Brit.  411. 

Power  looms  moved  by  water  or  steam  succeed  in  Scotland. 

Dre.ssing  and  warping  machine  for  power  looms  invented  by  Radcliff  and 
Jackson,  and  contributed,  much  to  their  success.  Blackwood's  Magazine 
for  January,  1836.  An  act  passed  in  England,  requiring  in  cotton  mills, 
as  well  as  some  others,  certain  clothes  for  apprentices — not  to  work  them 
more  than  12  hours  each  day — and  certain  instructions  in  letters  to  be  given 
to  them,  &c.     Wade's  history,  page  98. 

First  cotton  factory  built  in  New  Hampshire,  See  table  L,  note  [9].  Power 
loom,  as  now  used,  perfected  in  England,  and  patented  by  Harrock. 

Power  looms  successfully  and  widely  introduced  into  England  after  many 
failures. 

The  revolution  in  Spanish  America  begins  to  furnish  new  markets  for  cotton 
manufactures. 

Stamping  the  cylinders  for  printing  cloth  by  means  of  dies  introduced  at 
Manchester. 

Lace  machinery  much  improved  by  Heathcott. 

Digest  of  cotton  manufactures  in  the  United  States  by  Mr,  Gallatin,  and 
another  by  T.  Cox,  Esq.  and  public  attention  drawn  to  their  growing  im- 
portance. 

A  patent  for  making  bobbin  lace  by  machinery,  by  John  Burn ;  though  in- 
vented by  Mr.  Heathcott  in  1809.     McCulloch,  743. 

The  India  trade  made  more  free,  and  more  British  manufactures  sent  there- 
took  effect  April  4,  1814.     McCulloch,  page  538. 

The  power  loom  introduce^  into  the  United  States  first,  at  Waltham,  in 
1815,  it  is  said,  in  American.Encyclopedia,  article  "  Cotton." 

India  cotton  goods  less  imported  on  account  of  the  minimum  in  the  tariff  of 
1816.  Pitk.  Stat.  188.  Same  year  tlie;fly  frame  was  introduced  into  Eng- 
land. 

New  method  of  preparing  sewing  cotton  invented  by  Mr.  Holt.  Cotton  aver- 
aged about  34  cents  pef  poimd ;  the  highest  of  any  year  in  the  United 
States  since  1801. 

New  cotton  lands  sold  very  high  in  the  United  States. 

Steam  power  first  applied  with  success  extensively  to  lace  machinery. 

First  cotton  factory  erected  at  Lowell. 
First  export  of  raw  cotton  from  Egypt  to  England. 

Higher  duty  imposed  in  the  United  States  on  foreign  cotton  manufftctures  by 
the  minimum  principle.     See  table  O,  note  [3J. 


110 
p.— Dates  of  most  important  changes^  ${C. — Continued. 


1835 


1826 

1827 
1828 

1829 
1830 

1831 
1832 


1833 


1834 

1835 

tlOJ 


Self-acting  mule  spinner  patented  in  England  by  Roberts.  Baines,  207.  Same 
year  the  tube  frame  introduced  there  from  America.  Cotton  rose  to  21 
cents  per  pound,  and  great  speculations  in  it  in  the  United  States. 

First  exports  of  American  cotton  manufactures  to  any  considerable  value. 

Highest  duty  in  the  United  States  on  foreign  cotton  manufactures.  Table 
O,  note  [3.] 

About  this  time  Mr.  Dyer  introduces  a  machine  from  the  United  States  into 
England  to  make  cards. 

Duty  on  cotton  manufactures  imported  into  the  United  States  reduced.  Table 
O,  note  [3.]  By  1  and  2  William  4,  it  was  provided  in  England,  that,  in 
cotton  mills,  work  should  not  be  done  in  night  by  minors,  and  but  9  hours' 
work  on  Saturdays.     "Wade's  history,  page  113. 

Further  opening  of  India  trade  increases  the  market  there  for  EngUsh  and 
American  cotton  goods. 

<  Cotton  rose  to  16^  cents  per  pound — higher  than  any  other  year  since  1825. 
\  Extensive  purchases  of  new  cotton  lands  in  the  United  States. 


[1.]  In  the  16th  century,  cotton  manufactures  came  to  Europe 
from  India,  through  the  trade  of  Venice.  Smithers,  118.  He 
says  they  were  introduced  into  China  from  India  about  200  years 
earlier,  (Smithers,  page  152,)  having  existed  in  the  latter  coun- 
try from  the  first  knowledge  of  it.  From  Venice  the  trade  in 
them,  and  then  the  manufacture,  went  to  Flanders  about  1560. 
They  existed  in  Arabia  in  the  7th  century.  Found  in  America 
when  discovered,  at  the  close  of  the  15th  century. 

[2.]  In  the  17th  century,  A.  D.  1641,  rcfi^  cotton  came  to 
England  from  Cyprus  and  Smyrna,  and  was  taken  from  London 
to  Manchester  to  be  worked  up.  Smithers,  119.  Edin.  Rev. 
(1827)  page  2.  Though  cotton  manufactures  bad  been  imported 
early  as  A.  D.  1500  ;  and  the  first  act  of  Parliament  relating  to 
them,  nominally,  passed  in  A.  D.  1565,  though  probably  wool- 
lens were  intended.  Table  A,  note  [12.]  Calicoes  were  im- 
ported before  1631.  Smithers,  page  152.  Made  in  London, 
A.  D.  1681  ;  and  those  from  India  prohibited,  1721.  Smithers, 
page  153.     Baines,  79. 

Raw  cotton,  in  18th  century,  came  chiefly  from  the  French 
West  Indies,  Surinam,  Brazil,  and  Isle  of  Bourbon,  till  near  its 
close,  when  the  imports  began  from  the  United  States,  India,  &c. 
Smithers,  123.  In  1660,  England  prohibited  her  colonies  from 
sending  it  to  other  than-  British  ports  or  dependencies.  1  Mc 
Pherson's  Com.  486. 


Ill 

[3.]  Muslinsfirst  made  at  Paisley,  in  Scotland,  A.  D.  1700;  but 
they  did  not  succeed  well,  nor  cambrics,  till  1725,  in  Glasgow. 

In  1759,  French  cambrics  and  lawns  were  prohibited  by  law. 
Smithers,  154. 

[4.]  In  1769,  Arkwright  built  cotton  mills  at  Nottingham,  and 
in  1780,  at  Cromford,  &c.  the  first  moved  by  horse,  and  the 
next  by  water  power.  He  made  new  improvements,  and  took 
out  new  patents,  and,  in  1780,  commenced  actions  for  violating 
his  patents,  in  which  he  failed,  (Smithers,  155,)  though  in  some 
former  trials  on  his  first  patent  he  succeeded.  Supplement  to 
Encyclop.  Brit.  "  Cotton." 

Populace  began  to  destroy  cotton  machinery  in  Lancashire  in 
1779. 

The  first  spinning  machines  had  only  a  few  spindles,  say  8; 
but  afterwards  increased  to  80,  (Do.)  and  sometimes  to  120. 
McCulloch's  Diet,  page  438. 

On  machinery  of  other  kinds,  see  in  table,  A.  D.  1738. 

[5.]  The  raw  cotton  of  India,  the  Surats,  and  Bourbons,  was 
first  imported  into  England  in  1783.  Before,  that  from  Cayenne, 
Surinam,  Demarara,  St.  Domingo,  and  Essequibo,  was  chiefly 
used.    Smithers,  155. 

[6.]  But  Wyatt's  invention  does  not  appear  to  have  been  well 
matured  or  much  brought  into  use,  though  he  and  Paul  took  out 
a  patent  in  1738.    Baines's  Hist.    McCuUoch's  Diet.  439;  note. 

[7.]  It  is  a  remarkable  fact,  that  the  cotton  manufacture  was 
so  little  known  and  appreciated  in  England  when  Adam  Smith 
published  his  Wealth  of  Nations,  (in  A.  D.  1776,)  that  the  sub- 
ject is  believed  not  to  be  alluded  to  by  him  in  the  slightest  man- 
ner. So,  in  1794,  it  is  believed  Mr.  Jay  w^as  not  aware  that  cot- 
ton was  or  would  be  exported  from  the  United  States.  Pitk. 
Stat,  page  198.  See  table  F,  note  9,  page  33.  In  Postle- 
thwaite's  Diet.  "  Cotton,"  1766,  he  urged  its  cultivation  in  English 
plantations  suited  to  it,  and  seemed  to  anticipate  the  increasing 
importance  of  its  manufacture. 

[8.]  Mr.  Gallatin  states  this  to  be,  1791,  in  his  report  on  do- 
mestic manufactures,  April  17,  1810.  See  Gales  and  Seaton's 
Docs.  V.  2,  on  Finance,  p.  425. 


112 

[9.]  Cloths  were  sent  abroad  to  be  bleached  till  1750,  and 
required  8  months,  then  reduced  to  4  months,  and  in  1784,  Watt 
introduced  the  practice  of  bleaching  with  chlorine  in  a  few  hours 
into  England.     Baines's  Hist.  246  and  '7. 

[10.]  Many  of  the  above  dates  and  facts  appear  in  the  other 
tables  and  notes  ;  but  they  are  collected  here  in  chronological 
order,  with  some  other  material  events,  for  the  purpose  of  pre- 
senting, in  one  view  or  statement,  the  different  periods  in  which 
the  chief  progress,  from  fifty  to  a  hundred  years  past,  has  been 
made  in  the  growth,  cultivation,  and  trade  of  cotton. 


113 
Q- 

Extracts  as  to  the  subject  of  Cotton,  from  the  Annual  Treasury 
Report  in  December,  1835, 

1.  "From  this  it  appears  that  our  whole  exports,  of  every 
kind,  in  the  last  five  years,  including  the  estimates  for  1835, 
have  not  exceeded  those,  during  a  similar  term,  from  1803  to  1807, 
inclusive,  but  about  forty  millions,  and  being  an  excess  no  lar- 
ger than  at  most  intervening  periods,  while  an  extraordinary  in- 
crease has  taken  place  in  our  exports  of  domestic  products,  ex- 
ceeding in  value  those  during  that  term  more  than  one  hundred 
and  fifty  millions,  and  being  quite  doubled  the  excess  at  most  in- 
tervening periods.  Indeed,  it  will  be  seen  that  they  have  been 
almost  a  hundred  per  Cent,  larger  than  they  were  in  any  similar 
term  of  years,  previous  to  1816,  and  have  exceeded  those  dur- 
ing such  a  term,  only  ten  years  ago,  by  the  sum  of  about  one 
hundred  and  fifteen  millions  ;  a  difference  greater  than  the  whole 
amount  of  all  our  exports  of  domestic  products  during  the  first 
five  years  under  our  present  form  of  Government.  The  recent 
average  rate  of  increase  in  these  exports,  however,  has  not  been 
large,  independent  of  the  article  of  cotton ;  nor  is  it  likely  to 
augment  during  the  few  ensuing  years.  Adopting  a  eomparisoa 
between  every  term  of  ten  years,  from  1792,  '93,  and  '94,  to 
1832,  '33,  and  '34,  and  including  all  articles,  it  appears  that  the 
whole  exports  of  domestic  produce  exhibit  an  increase  in  the 
last  thirty  years  of  less  than  three  per  cent,  annually,  or  a  rate 
considerably  lower  than  that  of  our  population,  though,  in  the 
previous  term  of  ten  years,  by  the  great  prosperity  from  our  new 
form  of  Government,  and  the  rapid  progress  in  the  cultivation  of 
cotton,  that  increase  was  near  eight  per  cent. ;  and  in  the  high 
price  and  large  exports  of  this  article  in  the  last  term  of  ten 
years,  it  has  been  about  five  per  cent,  annually.  But  as  that 
price  has  of  late  been  unusually  high,  and  is  now  lower,  and  as 
the  demand  for  cotton  abroad  in  the  ensuing  year  is  not  likely  to 
exceed,  if  it  equal,  the  late  customary  ratio,  and  on  which  some 
interesting  facts  may  be  seen  in  the  statement  annexed,  (E,)  the 
value  of  our  whole  domestic  exports  (over  one-half  of  which  now 
consists  of  cotton)  will  probably  be  less  in  1836  than  in  1835. 

2.  "  It  may  be  instructive,  in  respect  to  the  estimates  of  our 
future  proceeds  from  lands,  to  recollect  that,  after  the  present 
system  commenced,  the  sales  never  amounted,  in  fact,  to  one 
million  of  acres  a  year  till  1815,  nor  to  two  millions  a  year  till 
the  temptations  of  the  credit  system,  and  the  great  rise  in  the 

15 


H4 

price  of  cotton  to  26  and  34  cents  per  pound,  induced  larger  pur- 
chases, extending  to  over  two  millions  of  acres  in  1817,  and 
about  five  and  a  half  millions  in  1819;  and  thus,  even  fifteen 
years  ago,  exceeding  in  quantity,  by  nearly  a  million  of  acres, 
the  large  sales  of  1834,  and  exceeding  them  in  the  sum  promised 
to  be  paid,  by  the  almost  incredible  amount  of  more  than  twelve 
millions  of  dollars.  But  the  fall  of  cotton  in  1820,  to  only  about 
half  its  former  price,  combined  with  other  causes,  left  the  pur- 
chasers in  debt  to  the  Government  over  twenty-two  millions  of 
dollars,  and  with  the  change  from  the  credit  to  the  cash  system, 
reduced  the  sales  again  to  much  less  than  a  million  of  acres  a 
year,  caused  nearly  six  millions  of  the  former  sales  to  revert,  and 
kept  them  down  to  less  than  a  million  in  every  year  after,  till  the 
rise  of  cotton  in  1825  gave  a  new  impulse,  which  being  aided  by 
other  powerful  causes,  the  sales  gradu-lly  enlarged  till  they 
reached  a  million  again,  in  1829.  Since  that,  increasing  still 
more  rapidly,  they  have  exceeded,  during  1834,  four  millions  of 
acres,  and  during  1835,  probably  nine  millions.  Among  those 
other  causes,  the  more  extensive  introduction  of  steam  power  on 
the  western  rivers  and  northern  lakes,  with  the  public  improve- 
ments in  their  navigation,  and  the  increased  facilities  of  inter- 
course by  railroads  and  canals,  have  of  late  added  much  to  the 
sales  of  the  public  lands  beyond  previous  years,  and  beyond  the 
proportional  increase  of  population.  To  the  force  of  these  causes 
have  been  joined,  during  the  last  three  years,  as  formerly  sug- 
gested, the  effect  of  the  pre-emption  law,  the  increase  in  the 
price  of  cotton,  and  the  unusual  abundance  of  surplus  capital  in 
1835,  seeking  new  investments." 

3.  "  Besides  what  has  already  been  remarked  on  the  influence 
which  the  increased  cultivation  of  cotton  in  this  country  has  in 
various  ways  exercised,  and  is  likely  to  exercise  hereafter,  on 
our  revenue  from  customs  and  lands,  it  might  be  made  a  subject 
of  further  and  very  interesting  inquiry,  in  connexion  with  the 
uncertainty  of  the  estimates  on  those  subjects,  aftecting,  as  that 
cultivation  does,  more  remotely,  not  only  our  revenue  from  lands 
and  customs,  but  the  balance  of  trade  and  the  export  of  specie, 
as  well  as  the  continuance,  by  means  of  mutual  dependence 
among  great  interests,  of  many  of  our  peaceful  and  prosperous 
relations,  both  at  home  and  abroad.  But  without  entering,  on 
this  occasion,  into  further  details  concerning  any  of  these  points, 
it  may  be  mentioned  as  a  very  striking  result  connected  with  the 
last  one,  and  as  furnishing  a  strong  presumption  in  favor  of  great- 
er exemption  hereafter  from  fluctuations  by  war  and  commercial 
restrictions,  that  while  the  quantity  of  cotton  exported  from  thisi 


115 

country  has  increased  from  half  a  million  of  pounds  in  1790,  to 
over  tliree  hundred  and  eighty  millions  in  1835,  and  has  exceed- 
ed in  value,  during  six  of  the  last  ten  years,  all  our  other  ex- 
ports of  domestic  products  of  every  description,  the  manufacture 
of  it  at  home,  and  chiefly  in  the  Northern  States,  has  increased, 
from  consuming  only  a  few  bales,  to  more  than  ninety  millions  of 
pounds  yearly,  and  to  that  extent  creates  a  new  and  strong  bond 
of  reciprocal  advantage  and  harmony ;  and  that  while  we  now 
furnish,  instead  of  the  small  quantity  in  the  first  years  of  our 
Government,  quite  fifteen-sixteenths  of  the  whole  cqiasumption 
of  raw  cotton  by  England,  and  seven-tenths  of  that  by  France, 
all  the  present  exports  of  it  to  Europe  from  all  the  rest  of  the 
world  do  not  probably  equal,  if  those  two  nations  could  obtain 
the  whole,  one-third  of  what  they  now  consume,  or  one-fourth 
of  what  they  now  import  from  the  United  States  alone  ;  and  thus, 
while  neither  of  them  produces  any  of  the  raw  article,  except  a 
little  in  some  remote  dependencies,  that  they  have  an  annual 
manufacture  now  relying  on  it,  and  chiefly  on  the  United  States, 
equal  in  France  to  eighty  millions  of  dollars,  and  in  England  to 
one  hundred  and  eighty  millions  of  dollars,  and  constituting  in 
the  latter,  after  it  supplies  her  own  large  necessities  at  home, 
over  one-half  in  value  of  her  great  annual  exports  to  all  quarters 
of  the  globe." 


116 

4. 
"EXPORTS  OF  COTTON. 


Year. 

Quantity. 

Value. 

Pounds. 

Dollar.^. 

1792 
1793 
1804 

138,328 

487,600 

1,601,760 

32,000 
107,272 
320,352 

3)2,227,688 

459,624 

742,562 

153,208 

Average. 

1802 
1803 
1804 

27^  millions. 
41 1^0       do. 
38 A       do. 

5^   millions. 

71         do. 
71         do. 

3)  106 1^0       do. 

201 

35.6 

6.9 

Average. 

1822 
1823 
1824 

144  i^o 
173,^0 
142,^0 

24 

20i 

211 

3)460,^0 

66i 

153.5 

22.1 

Average. 

1832 
1833 
1834 

322^ 
324i 

384| 

311 

36 

49i 

3)1,03U 

117^ 

344 

39.1 

Average. 

117 

"Note. — Looking  further  to  the  future,  in  connexion  with  the 
past,  a  brief  comparison  of  the  quantity  and  value  of  our  exports 
in  cotton  at  a  few  equi-distant  periods,  as  exhibited  in  the  above 
table,  will  serve  to  illustrate,  in  a  condensed  form,  the  great  in- 
fluence which  the  cultivation  and  exports  of  cotton  alone  seem 
to  have  exercised,  and  are  likely  to  exercise  hereafter,  on  the 
amount  of  our  whole  exports  of  domestic  products,  and  thus  in- 
directly to  affect  our  importations,  and  consequent  revenue  from 
customs.  Doubtless  some  other  cultivation  and  exports  would 
have  taken  the  place  of  cotton  in  the  South,  had  it  not  been  so 
successfully  grown  there ;  but  they  probably  would *have  been 
less  valuable,  and  will  be  so  hereafter,  if  ever  substituted  for 
that;  because  the  average  increase  of  all  our  domestic  exports, 
including  cotton,  has  been  only  from  3  to  5  per  cent.,  while  that 
alone  of  cotton  has,  during  the  last  30  years,  been,  on  an  average, 
near  25  per  cent,  annually.  But  of  late,  the  ratio  of  increase  in 
cotton,  though  still  much  greater  than  that  of  other  exports,  has 
become  diminished  and  more  settled,  having  fallen  from  quite 
600  per  cent.,  during  the  first  ten  years  of  our  present  Govern- 
ment, to  only  about  10  per  cent,  during  the  last  ten,  though  the 
whole  annual  quantity  now  exported  exceeds  the  enormous 
amount  of  380  millions  of  pounds.  This  10  per  cent,  increase 
yearly,  considering  the  vast  quantity  now  grown  in  the  United 
States,  and  how  fully  the  cotton  raised  in  the  other  quarters  of 
the  world  has  already  been  excluded  from  the  European  markets, 
with  other  circumstances  named  in  the  body  of  the  report,  may 
be  justly  estimated  both  as  a  more  regular  ratio  than  any  which 
has  prevailed  heretofore,  and  as  something  larger  than  its  proba- 
ble increase  in  the  ensuing  ten  years." 


118 


While  the  preceding  tables  and  notes  were  in  ^he  press,  Mr. 
Adams  submitted  the  following  resolution  ;  which  was  consider- 
ed and  agreed  to : 

^^  Resolved,  That  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  under  whose 
direction  the  printing  of  certain  tables  and  notes  on  the  subject 
of  cotton  has  been  placed  by  this  House,  be  authorized  to  add 
any  further  explanatory  notes  on  that  subject  which  may  occur 
to  him  in  the  progress  of  the  printing." 


119 


ADDENDA. 

Table  A,  note  3,  page  14.  Other  statements  made  in  some  of 
the  Atlantic  States,  and  at  other  periods,  show  a  smaller  differ- 
ence between  the  exports  of  1835  and  1836,  to  the  last  dates. 
In  some  accounts  of  the  exports  kept  in  the  Southwest  for  the 
current  year,  the  quantity  is  represented  there  to  be  less  at  the 
most  recent  dates  than  during  the  same  period  of  last  year  by 
about  70,000  bales,  and  the  stock  on  hand  to  be  about  100,000 
bales  less. 

Table  B,  page  20.  Cotton  has  been  raised  in  Illinois,  and 
even  in  Pennsylvania.  Niles's  Register,  February  and  March, 
1822,  pages  371  and  67.  But  it  is  believed  not  to  be  raised  of 
late  to  any  considerable  extent  north  of  Tennessee  and  Virginia. 
This  table  shows  another  striking  fact :  that  considerably  over 
half  the  whole  crop  of  cotton  in  the  United  States  is  now  raised 
in  the  new  Southwestern  States,  whose  outlets  are  on  the  Gulf 
of  Mexico,  and  where  little  was  grown  and  scarcely  any  ex- 
portation made  previous  to  1803. 

Table  C,  note  2,  page  28.  In  the  ninth  line  from  the  top,  the 
price  named  means  the  price  of  common  cotton. 

Table  L,  note  9,  page  87.  Since  these  tables  were  transmit- 
ted to  the  House  of  Representatives,  the  original  letter  which 
was  written  in  consequence  of  a  circular  from  Mr.  Hamilton, 
Secretary  of  the  Treasury,  on  the  subject  of  manufactures,  dated 
June  22,  1791,  from  Moses  Brown  to  J.  S.  Dexter,  dated  July 
22,  1791,  has  been  sent  to  me. 

It  confirms  the  statement  in  the  notes,  that  the  first  cotton  mill 
in  Rhode  Island  was  built  in  1790.  Attempts  had  been  made, 
Mr.  B.  says,  by  himself,  in  1789,  to  get  the  machinery  into  ope- 
ration by  water,  by  means  of  models  for  carding  and  spinning, 
which  the  State  of  Massachusetts  had  procured  from  abroad. 
But  no  mill  was  actually  begun  until  the  autumn  of  1789,  when 
one  was  commenced  by  the  assistance  of  Mr.  Slater,  who  had 
then  recently  come  from  England,  notwithstanding  the  obstacles 
which  were  opposed  to  the  emigration  of  artists,  and  the  exporta- 


120 

tion  of  machinery.  About  this  time  a  cotton  mill  was  erected 
at  Beverly,  Massachusetts,  by  an  incorporated  company.  See 
more  in  that  letter,  and  in  Gales  and  Seaton's  Docs.  vol.  1,  Fi- 
nance, page  142 ;  Hamilton's  Report  on  Manufactures,  and 
Pennsylvania  Mercury,  for  1789.  It  is  said  that  the  model  of 
the  machine  for  weaving  by  water  was  procured  from  England, 
by  some  persons  in  Delaware,  early  as  April,  1788.  See  Penn. 
Mercury. 

[Other  small  additions  to  the  notes  of  the  later  tables  were 
introduced  into  the  body  of  them  in  the  proper  places  while  they 
were  printing,  after  the  passage  of  the  resolution,  iKrgerted  im- 
mediately before  these  addenda.] 


THIS   BOOK   IS  DUE  ON   THE   LAST  DATE 
STAMPED   BELOW 


RENEWED  BOOKS  ARE  SUBJECT  TO  IMMEDIATE 
RECALL 


UUD  LiBRARr 
DUE  APK  2  3  1969 

APR  2  4  REC'D 


uu 


M^dm 


TdE  DEC  1 V  WZ 


^'^^lomj 


JAN     2  2004 


LIBRARY,  UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA,  DAVIS 

Book  Slip-10m-l,'6;3(D5068s4)458 


PAMPHLET  BINE 

ZZZZ  Syracuse,  N 
^H^Z   Stockton,  Ci 

A 


267822 


U.S.  Treasury  Dept 
Letter  from  the 


Call  Number: 

HD9070.1. 
1636 


r^asou*- 


:!) 


/-ID3070.4! 

I83fo 


267822 


?»i^  ■ja**'^ 


